Loading...
2013-05-07 City Council - Public Agenda-1493'4- o 90� AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers — Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds MAY 7, 2013 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE 1. `A 3. (5 Minutes) Roll Call (5 Minutes) Approval of Agenda (5 Minutes) Approval of Consent Agenda Items A. AM-5710 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of April 23, 2013. B. AM-5719 Approval of claim checks #201718 through #201827 dated April 25, 2013 for $448,428.83 and claim checks #201828 through #201947 dated May 2, 2013 for $492,863.38. Approval of payroll direct deposit & checks #60161 through #60177 for $443,836.54, benefit checks #60178 through #60189 and wire payments of $194,877.67 for the period April 16, 2013 through April 30, 2013. C. AM-5704 D. AM-5723 E. AM-5725 4. (5 Minutes) AM-5721 5. (5 Minutes) AM-5705 Packet Page 1 of 266 Approval of list of Edmonds' Businesses applying for renewal of their liquor license with the Washington State Liquor Control Board, April 2013. Authorization for Mayor to approve acceptance of right of way and easements from the Kwon Trust property for the Five Corners Roundabout Project. Authorization for Mayor to approve acceptance of right of way and easements from the Development Services of America property for the Five Corners Roundabout Project. Community Service Announcement: Memorial Day Ceremony Proclamation declaring May "Puget Sound Starts Here Month". 6. (5 Minutes) Proclamation in honor of National Police Week, May 12 - 18, 2013. AM-5711 7. Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings 8. (15 Minutes) Presentation by Nick Brossoit, Superintendent, Edmonds School District #15. AM-5707 9. (15 Minutes) Update on the Edmonds Sister City Commission by Michelle Van Tassell, Commission AM-5712 Chair. 10. (10 Minutes) Presentation on the North Sound SeaWolves semi -pro soccer team. AM-5729 11. (20 Minutes) Closed -record review of the Planning Board's recommendation to approve AM-5722 a City -sponsored rezone at 22133 and 22121 76th Avenue West (File No. PLN20130008). 12. (20 Minutes) Public Hearing: Proposed code amendment to increase the time frame for validity of AM-5718 preliminary short plat approval as established in ECDC 20.75.100 (File No. AMD20130002). 13. (30 Minutes) Presentation: Willow Creek Daylight Early Feasibility Study/Edmonds Marsh. AM-5717 14. (30 Minutes) Continued discussion on incorporating the Harbor Square Master Plan into the City's AM-5720 Comprehensive Plan. 15. (15 Minutes) Possible action regarding draft Resolution adopting Robert's Rules of Order as the City AM-5706 Council's new Rules of Procedure. 16. (5 Minutes) Mayor's Comments 17. (15 Minutes) Council Comments 18. (15 Minutes) Convene in executive session regarding pending litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). 19. (5 Minutes) Reconvene in open session. Potential action as a result of meeting in executive session. ADJOURN Packet Page 2 of 266 AM-5710 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: Consent Submitted By: Sandy Chase Department: City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Type: Action Committee Action: Information Subject Title Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of April 23, 2013. Recommendation Review and approval. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attached is a copy of the draft minutes. 04-23-13 Draft City Council Minutes Inbox Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Sandy Chase Final Approval Date: 05/02/2013 Attachments Form Review Reviewed By Date Dave Earling 05/01/2013 03:56 PM Sandy Chase 05/02/2013 09:45 AM Started On: 04/30/2013 08:16 AM 3. A. Packet Page 3 of 266 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES April 23, 2013 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5tn Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Lora Petso, Council President Strom Peterson, Councilmember Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Walker Kasinadhuni, Student Representative 1. ROLL CALL STAFF PRESENT Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation/Human Resources Reporting Director Rob English, City Engineer Kernen Lien, Senior Planner Jen Machuga, Associate Planner Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder City Clerk Sandy Chase called the roll. All elected officials were present. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council President Petso requested Agenda Items 17 and 18 be removed from the agenda. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Council President Petso requested Item H be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 2013. B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #201596 THROUGH #201717 DATED APRIL 18, 2013 FOR $1,226,036.24. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT & CHECKS #60137 THROUGH #60152 FOR $429,100.81, BENEFIT CHECKS #60153 THROUGH #60160 AND WIRE PAYMENTS OF $187,962.15 FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 1, 2013 THROUGH APRIL 15, 2013. C. APPROVAL OF LIST OF EDMONDS' BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR RENEWAL OF THEIR LIQUOR LICENSES WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD, MARCH 2O13. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 1 Packet Page 4 of 266 D. COMMUNITY SERVICES / ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT QUARTERLY REPORT - APRIL, 2013. E. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED APRIL 16, 2013 FOR THE 2013 WATERLINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO D&G BACKHOE IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,304,457.70. F. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO APPROVE RELEASE OF A UTILITY EASEMENT & ACCEPTANCE AND RECORDING OF NEW STORM UTILITY AND PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT. G. REQUEST TO AWARD THE WWTP STANDBY POWER DISTRIBUTION AND SWITCHGEAR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO EWING ELECTRIC, INC. ITEM H. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO APPLY DESIGN STANDARDS TO THE BD2, BD3 AND BD4 ZONES TO REPLACE THE REQUIREMENT FOR BUILDING STEP BACKS. THE PROPOSAL ALSO INCLUDES A PROVISION EXEMPTING SMALL DECORATIVE 'BLADE SIGNS' FROM SIGN CODE AREA CALCULATION LIMITATIONS. Council President Petso explained she supported removing the stepback from the BD2 — 4 zones and including a provision for exempting blade signs from sign code area calculation limitations. However, the ordinance also changes the base building height from 25 feet to 30 feet. She opposed the change in the building height at the public hearing and will vote against the ordinance. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE ITEM H, ORDINANCE NO. 3918, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTERS 16.43 AND 22.43 ECDC RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS (BD) ZONES. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, PETERSON, JOHNSON AND YAMAMOTO VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS AND BLOOM AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO VOTING NO. 4. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF WHITE CANE DAYS Mayor Earling read a proclamation declaring May 3-4, 2013 as Lions White Cane Days in Edmonds. He presented the proclamation to several members of the Edmonds Lions Club. Brian Evans, President, Edmonds Lions Club, explained the Lions Club has been in existence since 1917 and started with Helen Keller. Their focus is sight and hearing impairments but they also provide student scholarships, assist the Edmonds Food Bank, hold a raffle, and assist with Sierra Park for the Blind. They welcome assistance and new members. He presented Mayor Earling with a pen/flashlight. 5. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF LOYALTY DAY Mayor Earling read a proclamation declaring May 1, 2013 as Loyalty Day in the City of Edmonds. He commented it is particularly important to acknowledge this day in light of recent events in Boston. He presented the proclamation to Jim Blossey. Mr. Blossey introduced Commander Fred Apgar, VFW Post 8870. On behalf of Post 8870 and the hundreds of combat veterans who reside in Edmonds, Mr. Blossey thanked the Council for the proclamation. He encouraged the public to pause on May 1 to remember those who have served and those who have given their lives. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Maggie Fimia, Edmonds, expressed her disappointment with the outcome of the Harbor Square Master Plan. She envisioned someone coming to the City with a permit application to build a new home within the limits of the existing zoning and development code, noting they would expect to receive a permit. If Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 2 Packet Page 5 of 266 the neighbor protested and went to the City Council, it would be wrong for the Council to tell the Planning Department not to issue the permit. There are codes and laws because the City functions under a rule of law; predictable rules carried out as uniformly as possible, no favorites, no enemies. The GMA and Comprehensive Plan are existing rules; if the Council does not like the Comprehensive Plan, there is a process for amending it but they cannot just reject a project that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan without stating it is not consistent or how it is not consistent. The Council has not stated how the Harbor Square Master Plan with the recommendations provided by the Planning Board is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The appropriate process would have been to work with the Port on amendments that were amenable to all. She requested answers to the questions she sent last week and again today: 1. How the choice not to accept the Port's Master Plan and begin developing a Council subarea plan was consistent with the State GMA, which required the City to prepare a non -project EIS along with two pages of other significant and costly requirements. If the Council had amended the Port's proposal, those would not have been required. 2. How the Council could have adopted a subarea plan that was potentially inconsistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan such as no residential, no additional height, 150 foot buffers, and no mixed use. She referenced pages 51, 52 and 55 of the Comprehensive Plan that reference mixed use. Michael Schindler, Edmonds, commented he may have been rough on the Council last week, commenting this was a no -growth Council without a plan. He has yet to see a plan and expressed interest in seeing a plan. His business is located in Edmonds and three generations of his family live in Edmonds. Little can be accomplished without teamwork and partnership and work needs to be done with respect and with respect for people and process. In his view some processes were dropped. He pointed out a majority of the Council believe that major changes could be done to a vetted process and plan without consequences. The consequences are serious and if action is not taken to rectify the consequences, they will be long lasting. The consequences include public trust, health of the marsh, public enjoyment of the marsh, economic development, ability to comply with GMA and environmental goals, housing prices, downtown vibrancy, future development proposals by responsible developers, perception of government as wasteful and arrogant, and loss of revenue. He urged the Council to develop a plan for public review. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, explained tonight the Council passed an ordinance that raised building heights in Edmonds, an ordinance that is based on a public hearing that only advertised step -backs for the BD2 — 4 zones and blade signs with no reference to building heights. Neither tonight's agenda nor the public hearing referenced building heights. He explained the building height in Edmonds was established as 25 feet in Edmonds several years ago; anything above that is an incentive, not a standard height. With the passage of the ordinance, 30 feet is now the standard building height. He said the Council, 1) conducted an illegal hearing because it was not properly advertised and 2) did not include results of the ordinance on building heights in the description. He summarized Councilmembers Buckshnis, Yamamoto, Peterson and Johnson all voted to raise building heights. 7. ANNUAL REPORTS BY THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY TOURISM BUREAU AND SNOHOMISH COUNTY TOURISM PROMOTION AREA. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton introduced Amy Spain, Executive Director, Snohomish County Tourism Bureau. Ms. Spain described the importance of tourism to economic development. Visitors to Washington State spent $16.9 million in 2012; accounting for nearly $1.1 billion in local/state tax revenues. She described the impact of tourism on wages, salaries, profits and taxes. The Washington Tourism Alliance (WTA) was created when the State tourism office closed in 2011; as a membership organization, it is not a sustainable, competitive model. She highlighted competitor states' tourism budgets. WTA's long term funding principles include: • Privately governed • Possibly some state funding, but not control Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 3 Packet Page 6 of 266 • Broad -based responsibility • Inclusive of all sectors of the tourism industry • Currently evaluating alternative models and funding levels • Partnership with other tourism sectors (retail, transportation, hotels, recreation, attractions) • Critical long term funding issues include: o Dedicated funds o Industry sector balance o Sectors determine assessment method o Show return on Investment o Requested bridge funding from State Legislature Ms. Spain commented travel and tourism is one of the most important "export -oriented" industries in Washington. Spending by visitors generates sales in lodging, food services, recreation, transportation, and retail businesses — the "travel industry." These sales support jobs for Washington residents and contribute tax revenue to local and state governments. She provided several statistics regarding the impact of travel to the local economy: • Overnight travelers to Washington State: o Average 2.3 people per travel party o Stay 2.5 nights o Spend $458 per travel party per day o Totaling $16.9 billion • The economic impact of tourism in Snohomish County includes 9,340 jobs, $217.3 million in payroll, $16.6 million in local taxes, and $45.9 million in State taxes • Visitor spending in Snohomish County is $875.8 million per year; up 1% from previous year • The recovery in the travel industry is stabilizing: Washington State as a whole increased revenue 6.9% while room demand increased by just 3.3% • Snohomish County's recovery is being led by increased revenue: 10.7% increase in revenue and a 1.7% increase in demand over 2011 Ms. Spain also reported the following: • Generated 13,176 requests for information from ads; a slight decrease from 2011 • Web visitors for Snohomish.org, SnohomishCountyWeddings.com and RoomsAtPar.com; up 23.4 % over 2011 • SCTB visitor centers served 11,974 visitors. Countywide centers served 91,386 visitors. • Achieved $458,000 of free media coverage — up 4% • 7,415 definite and 6,150 tentative group and convention room nights were booked in 2012 representing $21 million in economic impact • Hotel occupancy levels were up 1.7% to 66.5%; ADR was up 8.8% leading to an increase in RevPar of 10.7% • Hotel motel tax collections were up 5.7%. She reported on convention and group tour sales and service: • Ads were placed in meeting and event planners, reunion and sports related publications generating requests for information • Conducted 16 familiarization tours for meeting, group tour and international tour and travel planners and domestic and international media in the communities of Edmonds, Everett, Lynnwood, Monroe, Mukilteo, Snohomish, Stanwood, Sultan and Tulalip • Conducted 4 sales missions to Vancouver BC, Olympia, Seattle, Boulder CO and Colorado Springs, resulting in 45 new leads for hotels and attractions in Snohomish County and distribution of 86 packets of information Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 4 Packet Page 7 of 266 • 19 trade shows generated 13,773 direct leads and distribution of 3,764 tourism guides in 2012 • Assisted 44 groups with conference services distributing 1,600 guides to attendees • Group tour, meeting and event planner bids were prepared which resulted in 7,415 total definite room nights with an economic impact of $17.3million • Additional pending bookings at year end totaled 6,150 room nights and an additional $3.7 million of economic impact. • Primary decrease in economic impact due to recording Pacific Rim Gymnastics Championships in 2011 The sports market continues to be a significant segment contributing $15.4 million in economic impact. Recognition and awards included: • Finalist for NASC Member of the Year • Sports Events Magazine Readers' Choice Award for the 3rd year Ms. Spain reported on tourism development: • Ads generated 13,176 total requests for information in 2012 • Additionally, there were over 8,000 visits to RoomsAtPar/StayShopAndSave websites as a result of advertising presence • Media buys were placed in a variety of media outlets including Alaska Airlines in-flight magazine, North Sound Living, Outdoors NW, National Geographic Traveler, Budget Travel, Westworld, Vancouver BC newspapers and online sources • Website visitation to primary site was up over 2012 by 23%. Weddings website was up by 19% • 85,000 copies of an official visitor guide including seasonal calendars of events, and seasonally oriented articles on communities and attractions • Six issues of StoryLine were mailed to over 1,400 travel writers with each issue • Conducted a media sales mission to Vancouver, BC • Attended Society of American Travel Writers and Travel Media Showcase • Conducted media fams for 17 travel writers — Snohomish, Mukilteo, Tulalip, Edmonds, Everett, Stanwood, Monroe and all points in between • Sent 16 press releases • Over 160 media pitches and responses to writers and travel publications requests • 50 articles were published • Efforts resulted in $458,000 of free media coverage — up 4% • Increased usage of Flickr, Twitter, Facebook and Pinterest Jennifer Bravo, Visitor Services Manager, Snohomish County Tourism Bureau (SCTB), described continued partnerships with City of Snohomish, Snohomish Chamber of Commerce, Historic Downtown Snohomish and the Historical Society of Snohomish, City of Lynnwood Tourism and Parks & Recreation, as well as Alderwood Manor Heritage Association and SnoIsle Genealogical Society. She reported the north county Visitor Information Center (VIC) was closed due to limited visitor traffic and SCTB now manages the VIC at the Future of Flight and Boeing Tour facility. She provided a snapshot of visitors: • 48% from more than 50 miles away 0 10% from other Washington counties 0 23% from other states 0 15% from other countries • 52% from local area (including surrounding counties) Ms. Bravo explained they have over 100 volunteers who work at VICs as well as events in the community. She described events that volunteers participate in, training provided to volunteers, and three Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 5 Packet Page 8 of 266 familiarization tours held in 2012 to Snohomish, Stanwood and Tulalip, and Lynwood and Edmonds that included tours of six lodging facilities from Edmonds to Arlington, Marysville and Mukilteo. Ms. Spain described industry education the Bureau provided: • Four countywide tourism related programs • Creation of two of six planned video training segments: o Aviation attractions o Shopping and gaming • Four additional video training segments planned in 2013 o Arts, Culture and History o Farms, Agriculture, Wineries and Distilleries o Outdoor Recreation o Spectator Sports • Creation of Tourism Bingo, a training program for frontline hospitality staff members • Two training familiarization tours held for frontline staff members at local hotels She reviewed 2013 initiatives: • Launch of the new destination brand • Launch new website • Four more training videos • Industry sector events/tours/tickets to train • frontline staff • New cyber tours • New itineraries, maps and promotions to assist visitors in exploring all of Snohomish County Jessica Voelker, Coordinator, Snohomish County Tourism Promotion Area (TPA), thanked the City and Council for their continued support of the TPA, and Mr. Clifton who serves on the TPA Board. She explained the TPA is a funding source established by the lodging industry to increase overnight stays in Snohomish County. The grant is open to applications from non-profit and for -profit organizations as well as municipalities. The grants can fund a wide range of expenses outside marketing and promotion such as facilities costs, bid fees and transportation. Grant applications are available online and are accepted on an ongoing basis; applications are due on the first of each month. She displayed the TPA's website, www.snocotpa.com. The website includes information on previously funded projects and eligibility requirements. Fourteen projects were funded in 2012 and an additional 14 have been funded to date in 2013. Four projects in 2012 affected Edmonds directly and two took place in Edmonds; these included: • Triple Crown Sports Memorial Day Tournament — more than 160 teams competed in a youth baseball tournament over a 3-day period o Four of the fields were in the Edmonds School District • Snohomish County Sports and Marketing Program • Write on the Sound Writers Conference • Edmonds Half Marathon — TPA Board recommended funding but the event was ultimately not eligible for reimbursement In 2013 there has been only one applicant from Edmonds; that applicant was not recommended for a TPA grant but she directed them to alternative funding sources such as the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) and the Hazel Miller grant. Three Edmonds programs were funded in 2012 via LTAC: Olympic Ballet, Edmonds Center for the Arts and Edmonds wayfinding signs. Ms. Voelker provided an educational flyer regarding applying for a financial grant via the TPA. Ideas for future funding in Edmonds from the TPA could include the development of new festivals, conventions, tech conferences, multi -day events and expos, a run or athletic event, state choir championship or multi - day sporting event. The TPA was designed to be flexible to provide resources to bring economic Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 6 Packet Page 9 of 266 development and overnight stays to the City. She considered herself an advocate for the lodging industry as well as the community and is always available to meet personally with prospective applicants to discuss their projects before and during the application process. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the 1% increase in visitor spending in Snohomish County and asked how that compared to other counties in the state and nation. Ms. Spain answered due to the closure of the State Tourism Office, any marketing in Washington State is done by individual destination marketing organizations. In 2012 the Seattle Visitor's Bureau was successful in creating a program similar to the TPA that generated $8 million that was used to advertise the region and Washington State. As a result, Seattle had a much higher increase in visitor spending. Tri-Cities received approximately $1 million in federal grants that was used for tourism promotion; they too saw an increase in visitors. She summarized the increase fluctuates by county. Snohomish County is typically in the top three in regard to visitor spending. She offered to provide the percentage for each county. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the SCTB interacted with the Economic Alliance Snohomish County. Ms. Spain answered Economic Alliance Snohomish County partners with SCTB on specific tourism -related projects. The Alliance's focus is on lobbying efforts and economic development. 8. DISCUSSION: PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE TIME FRAME FOR VALIDITY OF PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAT APPROVAL AS ESTABLISHED IN ECDC 20.75.100 (FILE NO. AMD20130002). Associate Planner Jen Machuga explained a subdivision into four lots or less is considered a short plat. Currently ECDC 20.75.100 limits the validity of preliminary short plat approval to 5 years. During that timeframe, the applicant would need to submit for civil review or provide the City with detailed engineering drawings showing proposed civil improvements associated with the subdivision. Following the City's review and approval of the civil plans, the applicant may either construct or bond for the civil improvements. At the end of that phase of the process, the applicant would then submit for final review where staff checks that all conditions of preliminary short plat approval have been met and the subdivision would be recorded with Snohomish County. In the past this process was completed by most applicants well under the five year time limit. However, the economic downturn caused unanticipated delays to several projects. Recognizing the impact of the economic downturn, State law was revised to increase the timeframe for the validity of formal plats, subdivisions into 5 lots or more, to 7 years for formal plats that received preliminary approval on or before December 31, 2014, after which the timeframe for formal plats will revert to 5 years. At the January 22, 2013 Council meeting a member of the public requested the City consider increasing the current 5 year timeframe for preliminary short plats to 7 years to provide applicants impacted by the economic downturn an opportunity to complete their projects. This was discussed with the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee on February 11, 2013; the committee was receptive to potentially increasing the timeframe and forwarded the item to the Planning Board. The Planning Board held a discussion and a public hearing and recommended approval of extending the current short plat timeframe. Ms. Machuga stated the draft code provides reference to State law requirements regarding the timeframe for formal plats as well as new language related to the timeframe for short plats to increase the timeframe to 7 years for short plats that obtained preliminary approval on or before December 31, 2013, and a 5 year time frame for short plats that obtained preliminary approval on or after January 1, 2014. The draft code establishes the provision to extend the time limit to 2 years from the effective date of the ordinance for short plats that obtained preliminary approval on or after January 1, 2006 and would have expired prior to adoption of the ordinance. She pointed out a public hearing is scheduled on May 7; tonight is intended to provide the Council an overview prior to the public hearing and to answer any questions. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 7 Packet Page 10 of 266 Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for providing examples she requested of timeframes established for short plat approval for other cities. She expressed her support for moving forward. Councilmember Bloom commented the draft ordinance references RCW 58.17.140 but does not reference the specific time limits established. She asked whether the time limits could be included in the ordinance. City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained that provision of the RCW has changed multiple times in the last few years due to the economic downturn. Rather than amend the City's code whenever the Legislature changes the timeline, it is preferable to reference the applicable RCW. Councilmember Bloom asked the current time limits. Mr. Taraday answered it is as long as 9 years in some cases. Ms. Machuga commented the Legislature made a recent change to the RCW. 9. APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR'S REQUEST FOR AN ADDITIONAL PERIOD OF APPOINTMENT OF ROB CHAVE AS ACTING DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO INCLUDE JANUARY 1, 2013 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013, AND CORRESPONDING OUT OF CLASS PAY. Councilmember Bloom commented her concerns are not related to Rob Chave as the Acting Director but with the process. She referred to the March 6, 2012 minutes in which Mayor Earling stated he understood the Council's interest in a policy change regarding a policy change regarding future appointments and pointing out this is an interim position to last no longer than the end of the year. Her concern was extending this again, relaying everyone dropped the ball by not funding the position in 2013. She recalled the Development Services Director position was vacated by Duane Bowman in 2007/2008. It is a key position that has been vacant for a long time; Mr. Chave has done the job of both the Planning Manager and the Development Services Director last year and was being asked to do it again this year. She wanted to ensure the Development Services Director position was funded during the 2014 budget process. Councilmember Buckshnis advised the out of class pay was included in the 2013 budget. Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding that the Interim Development Services Director position was to end December 31, 2012. Therefore, the 2013 budget process should have included funds for a Development Services Director. Councilmember Buckshnis explained she was aware during the 2013 budget discussions that the position would not be filled due to budget constraints. She expressed support for appointing Mr. Chave to an additional period as the acting director. She suggested the Council discuss whether the Development Services Director position would continue as a vacant position or should be removed. Council President Petso agreed the action taken last year was to appoint an acting director temporarily through yearend and the action tonight is to appoint Mr. Chave to the position temporarily until the end of 2013. She was content to extend the appointment of Mr. Chave for the year and wait until the budget process to discuss the position further. At that time the Council may have levy results and the position could then be considered for restored funding. Council President Petso recalled when the Council discussed the appointment last year, there were questions about the process of appointing an interim director and revisions to Chapter 2. The Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee discussed that for two months and were to review it again but did not. She will schedule it for the next Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee meeting. Mayor Earling explained during the budget process he made a conscious decision not to seek a full-time Development Services Director position and continue with an acting director. He anticipated with benefits, the cost for that position would be $135,000 - $160,000/year. Had that position been filled, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 8 Packet Page 11 of 266 another full time position would have been eliminated. He assured Mr. Chave has done a spectacular job fulfilling that role during the past year and is willing to do so again this year. Councilmember Bloom wanted to ensure this issue is addressed because it is a key position and has many oversight responsibilities. She suggested considering other options to make that position work. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO, THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MAYOR'S REQUEST FOR AN ADDITIONAL PERIOD OF APPOINTMENT OF ROB CHAVE AS ACTING DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO INCLUDE JANUARY 1, 2013 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND THE CORRESPONDING OUT OF CLASS PAY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. DISCUSSION REGARDING ALTERNATIVES FOR NON -REPRESENTED LONGEVITY COMPENSATION. Parks & Recreation/Human Resources Reporting Director Carrie Hite explained this is a continued discussion from July and September 2012, and the November 2012 Finance Committee. The City hired a compensation consultant last year to complete a salary survey and recommend nonrepresented compensation policy language which the Council adopted in September 2012. At that time the Council requested staff present options regarding longevity compensation to the Finance Committee. The packet includes a table of longevity compensation that represented employees receive. The Finance Committee discussed longevity compensation in February 2013 and recommended it be presented to full Council for discussion. The consultant's recommendation was to support some type of longevity compensation in consideration of, 1) the commitment of the tenure of City staff, 2) comparison with comparable cities and internal comparisons, and 3) recognizing the reduction in earning potential with the new nonrepresented employee salary ranges. If the Council chose to apply longevity compensation commensurate with SEIU and/or Teamsters, the financial impact to the City would be $37,413 with the current tenure of staff: 0 7 employed for 19+ years 0 6 employed 14-19 years 0 4 employed for 10-14 years 0 9 employed for more than 5 years 0 13 employed less than 5 years Ms. Hite requested direction from the Council regarding longevity compensation. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented the longevity pay for the represented groups is based on a package of compensation that each group negotiates. She was concerned with considering only one of the package items, longevity pay, for nonrepresented employees. She was also concerned that this was not the best economic climate to present this to the citizens. Ms. Hite explained a full package was presented to the Council with the results of the salary survey conducted by the compensation consultant. The Council pulled longevity compensation from the package and asked to have it discussed separately. For Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, Ms. Hite explained the compensation consultant made several recommendations. One was to place nonrepresented employees on a salary range progression as it was subjective when employees received steps or increases and the City was increasing its own liability without objectivity in the nonrepresented salary ranges. The salary ranges now mirror represented employees at 5%. Every nonrepresented employee was placed on a step and the steps are advanced by 5% subject to authorization of Council via the budget process. That recommendation was approved by Council. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 9 Packet Page 12 of 266 Another of the consultant's recommendations was cost of living adjustments (COLA) commensurate with union employees. The Council approved the Mayor including COLAs in the budget subject to Council approval/revision. In the salary comparisons with comparable cities, there were several compensation packages offered by other cities that Edmonds does not offer nonrepresented employees. For example, deferred compensation of 1% and 2%, which was not approved by the Council. Several cities offered 40 and 50 hours of management leave; the Council approved management leave of 24 hours. The consultant also recommended an educational incentive for commissioned police officers which was not approved by the Council. There was also discussion regarding employment contracts for director level positions and possibly other nonrepresented positions. She summarized the Council approved the 5% salary ranges/steps which reduced salary growth potential for nonrepresented employees by 50%, placed nonrepresented employees on steps and progressing through steps at 5% subject to Council approval via the budget process, Mayor -recommended COLA increases that are subject to Council approval, and management leave. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the longevity compensation would affect 26 nonrepresented employees. She observed the total impact on the budget was approximately $37,000 for the 26 employees on a percentage basis based on the table in the Council packet. She acknowledged these are trying times but some employees have been with the City for a long time. She expressed support for some type of longevity compensation due to the importance of a monetary reward for long time employees. Councilmember Peterson commented on the extra work done by staff due to the limited amount of staff. He supported longevity pay equal to SEIU, commenting that was a small price to pay for the loyalty, expertise and history of long time staff, an invaluable resource. This is especially an invaluable resource in an economy that is turning around; the City needs to retain its experienced staff as the job market becomes more competitive. Council President Petso inquired about the vacation benefit for nonrepresented employees, whether they received full vacation from day one. Ms. Hite answered directors start at one amount of vacation with no increase; other employees start at a low level that increases over time, commensurate with union employees. Council President Petso asked why would anyone want to be in a union if nonrepresented employees receive all the benefits given to union employees and even more for directors. Ms. Hite answered a union employee is a protected employee who can bump during layoffs; nonrepresented employees can be laid off at any time with no bumping rights. Union employees are able to earn comp time or overtime for hours over 40 hours/week which nonrepresented employees do not. In the past 1'/2 months there have been opportunities for 2 staff to promote within the organization from a union position to a non -union position and neither wanted to be a nonrepresented employee due to the vulnerability of those positions. As a result, recruitment was done outside the organization for those two positions. She summarized one of the advantages of considering the benefit package for nonrepresented employees is the ability to attract internal candidates. She expected that would continue to happen in the future. The Council had several discussions regarding nonrepresented compensation last year and there has been discussion by union employees who do not want to promote from within the organization. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented that was their choice. She reiterated nonrepresented employees received 24 hours of management leave, a 5% step and a COLA. She supported paying people a decent salary and paying what they were worth. But when the Council may be considering the possibility of a levy, she was not interested in adding longevity pay in addition to management leave, the 5% step and COLA. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 10 Packet Page 13 of 266 Council President Petso summarized there seems to some interest in presenting a draft longevity compensation proposal to the Council. Ms. Hite suggested if the Council made a decision tonight, it could be incorporated into the policy with policy changes presented to the Council to reflect longevity compensation. She clarified not all nonrepresented employees received management leave, only managers and directors. The other nonrepresented employees can request approval for hour -for -hour comp time. Councilmember Johnson asked whether the recommendation was for this fiscal year and if so, how would it be funded, or is it a recommendation for the next fiscal year. Ms. Hite responded the recommendation is a policy change and the funding source is year-end balance. The Council can decide when it would be effective. There are four options: 1. Effective retroactively to January 2013 2. Start it July 1 3. Include it in 2014 budget 4. Do nothing Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the compensation study provided a comparison of other cities. Ms. Hite replied the survey provided information from cities that responded to the survey request. Councilmember Buckshnis asked staff to provide a comparison of what other cities do for their nonrepresented employees. Council President Petso preferred the Council not take action tonight so that the Council could receive the information Councilmember Buckshnis requested and because this item was scheduled on the agenda as a discussion item. Not taking action tonight would also give Ms. Hite an opportunity to discuss the issue and the timing with the levy team. Mayor Earling summarized this item will be scheduled on a future agenda with the information the Council requested. 11. PARK IMPACT STUDY RESULTS Mayor Earling reported he attended the Washington Recreation and Park Association (WRPA) Annual Conference in Vancouver, Washington, where Edmonds received three awards: • Edmonds Floretum Garden Club • Best Facility — Hazel Miller Plaza • Edmonds' partnership with Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood on 3`d grade swim lessons sponsored by Verdant Mayor Earling advised Ms. Hite is the President-elect of WRPA. Ms. Hite stated a press release will be issued to announce the awards. She explained the Floretum Garden Club received one of the highest awards that WRPA gives, a Citation of Merit — Organization. Ms. Hite explained the Council authorized the completion of a Park Impact Fee Study on March 6, 2012. The City hired a consultant, Randy Young, Henderson Young and Company, to prepare the study. Randy Young, Henderson Young and Company, explained a park impact fee is one way to augment funding of the capital cost of the City's park system and there are a number of options. He explained the initial mission was to identify the maximum defensible impact fee under Washington law that the City could choose to charge. Over 70 Washington cities have a park impact fee, many do not. His role was not as an advocate for a park impact fee but an expert resource in determining whether a park impact fee is appropriate for Edmonds. Mr. Young provided a definition of an impact fee: a one-time payment paid by new development for capital costs of facilities needed by new development. He identified reasons to charge impact fees: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 11 Packet Page 14 of 266 Revenue: for public facilities Policy: growth pays a portion of costs so taxpayers don't pay the whole cost Quality of life: public facilities keep up with growth To the question of why Edmonds needs an impact fee when Edmonds is built out, Mr. Young pointed out: • Conversions from single-family to multi -family, and/or construction of multi -family • Population growth next six years = 1,237 • Transportation impact fees collected in Edmonds for 2004 — 2010 = $ 571,872 Mr. Young reviewed the rules for impact fees: 1. Fair Share= growth only, not deficiencies 2. "Reasonably needed", "proportionate share" = fee proportional to impacts 3. Credits = no double charging (e.g. need to consider funding in CIP) 4. "Cannot rely solely on impact fees" = cannot charge 100% of growth's costs He reviewed what impact fees can/cannot pay for: • Can pay for "system improvements" in adopted CIP • Cannot pay for "project improvements" (i.e., common areas of the development) • Cannot pay for repair, replacement, renovation • Eligible land and facilities include parks, open space and recreation facilities Factors in the calculation of park impact fee include: 1) Growth forecast; 2) Cost per "person;" and 3) Impact fee rates Growth Forecast Mr. Young displayed and reviewed forecasts for population growth forecasts for 1940- 2025 (table 2, page 10 of study) from the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan and employment growth forecasts (table 3, page 11) from the Puget Sound Regional Council for 2000-2025. He explained the proposed impact fee could be charged to residential as well as businesses. He displayed and reviewed a Growth of Equivalent Population and Employment by land use category. A coefficient is determined based on the number of hours an employee works, type of business, amount of time they work in the City and the number of customers they attract. He summarized the total 2011-2025 Growth Equivalent Population was 5,880. Cost per Person Asset Inventory and Capital Value (table 5, pages 14-15) Acres Land Value Improvement Value Total Value 210.4 1 $64,887,480 $15,486,982 $80,374,372 Value of Parks per equivalent Population (table 6, page 15) Total Value of Current (2011) Capital Value per Edmonds Parks Equivalent Population Equivalent Population $80,374,372 - 45,314 = $1,773.71 Value of Parks Needed for Growth (table 7, page 16) Capital Value per Growth of Value Needed Equivalent Population Equivalent Population for Growth $1,773.71 x 5,880 = $10,429,210 Investment Needed in Parks for Growth (table 8, page 17) Value Needed Value of Existing Investment Needed for Growth Reserve Capacity for Growth $10,429,210 0 $10,429,210 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 12 Packet Page 15 of 266 Investment in Parks to be Paid by Growth (table 9, page 18) Investment Needed City Investment for Investment to be For Growth Growth @ 30.33 % Paid by Growth $10,429,210 - $3,163,265 = $7,265,945 Growth Cost per Person (table 10, page 19) Investment to be Paid Growth of Equivalent Growth Cost Per by Growth Population Equivalent Population $7,265,945 - 5,880 = $1,235.73 Impact Fee Rates Impact Fee Der Unit (table 11. Dafie 19) Type of Development Growth Cost Per Equivalent Person Equivalent Population Coefficient Unit of Development Impact Fee Per Unit of Development Residential — single family $1,235.73 2.2125000 Dwelling unit $2,734.05 Residential — multi -family $1,235.73 1.8937500 Dwelling unit $2,340.16 Retail $1,235.73 0.0020038 Square foot $2.48 Office $1,235.73 0.0005056 Square foot $0.62 Manufacturing $1,235.73 0.0005814 Square foot $0.72 Construction $1,235.73 0.0001986 Square foot $0.25 Mr. Young referenced tables in the appendix that were used to create the Equivalent Population Coefficient: Employee Hours in Location (per employee) — Table A-1, page 21, Visitor Hours in Location (per employee) — Table A-2, page 22, and Table A-3, page 22. Mr. Young reviewed potential revenue from park impact fees: • Equivalent population population growth to 2025 = 5,880 • 5,880 growth - 12 years = 490/year • 490 x $1,235 = $605,000 / year Mr. Young provided a comparison of park impact fees for single family for Edmonds and peer cities: $ 6,404 Issaquah $ 2,438 Mukilteo 5,933 Mill Creek 2,329 Kenmore 4,579 Monroe 2,000 Bellevue 4,305 Duvall 2,000 Brier 4,150 Snohomish 1,879 Mountlake Terrace 3,845 Kirkland 1,726 Woodinville 3,175 Sultan 1,662 Arlington 3,100 Redmond 1,345 Bothell 2,734 Edmonds 1,251 Marysville 427 Mount Vernon Mr. Young explained the impact fee rate study provides sound basis for park impact fees, but Edmonds has options: 1. Residential only, not commercial • Removal all data about employment • Revise cost per person • Do the math to calculate new rates Example: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 13 Packet Page 16 of 266 Type of Housing Rate if both Residential and Business Rate if Only Residential $ Difference % Difference Single family $2,734 $3,320 $586 21.4% Multi -family $2,340 $2,842 $502 21.4% 2. Reduce rates across the board • Identify the rate that concerns the Council the most (i.e. multi -family at $2,340) • Identify the amount the Council is willing to charge (i.e. $1800) • Divide the "willing" rate by the full rate ($1,800 _ $2,340 = 77% • Apply the same % to all other rates Example: Type of Housing Unit Full Rate in Study Rate @ 77 % Single family Dwelling unit $2,734 $2,105 Multi -family Dwelling unit $2,340 $1,800 Retail Square foot 2.48 $1.91 Office Square foot 0.62 0.48 Manufacturing Square foot 0.72 0.55 Construction Square foot 0.25 0.19 3. Phase in rates over 2 or more years • Select the final rate when fully phased in • Select the beginning rate for the first year • Select the number of years for phase in • Do the math and create the phasing schedule Example: Type of Housing Unit Year 1 @ 80 % Year 2 @ 90 % Year 3 @ 100 % Single family Dwelling unit $2,187 $2,461 $2,734 Multi -family Dwelling unit 1,872 2,106 $2,340 Retail Square foot 1.98 2.23 2.48 Office Square foot 0.50 0.56 0.62 Manufacturing Square foot 0.58 0.65 0.72 Construction Square foot 0.20 0.23 0.25 4. Exempt low-income housing • Adopt definition of "low income housing" • Identify timing of paying for exempted fees • Identify source of paying for exempted fees Student Representative Walker Kasinadhuni referred to option 1 where businesses are exempt from paying impact fees and asked why the same could not be done for low income housing. Mr. Young answered choosing not to charge business is not an exemption under the statute. It would be a finding by the City Council that the impact of the business community on the parks systems is not enough to require they pay an impact fee. There is explicit authorization in the statute for exemptions for low income housing and other broad public purposes which has come to mean something like exempting the school district from the transportation impact fee. Mr. Young continued his review of options: 5. Increase revenue from other sources • Identify other sources that could be raised such as grants, local taxes, bonds • Determine the amount that can be raised • Revise the 30.33% city investment Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 14 Packet Page 17 of 266 6. Do not adopt park impact fees • Raise other revenue o Consequence is growth pays less, taxpayers pay more • Reduce level of service o No new parks, quality of life is reduced Mr. Young explained the purpose of tonight's presentation was to take Council comments, questions. Next steps include finalizing the impact fee study and, if the Council is interested in proceeding, preparing a draft ordinance and holding a public hearing. City Attorney Jeff Taraday commented there are a lot of unknowns with regard to how the courts will treat impact fee assumptions in Mr. Young's presentation. His reaction was it was an extremely conservative approach to impact fees. For example, the 30% reduction for other funding, there is nothing in State law that requires all grant funds to be excluded from the impact fee calculation. He did not necessarily think the maximum fee Mr. Young stated the City could charge would be the maximum but it was a way of looking at it. Mr. Young concurred, suggesting if the 30% were not included in the calculation, the Council could indicate the grant funds would be used for repairs and maintenance that are not intended to serve new development. Councilmember Buckshnis requested a copy of Mr. Young's PowerPoint. She asked what other cities do not charge a commercial park impact fee. Mr. Young responded out of 74-75 cities that charge a park impact fee, only 10 charge a commercial impact fee (Redmond, Mountlake Terrace (only Town Center), Arlington, Tukwila, Poulsbo, Linden, Pasco, Burlington, Sumner, Ephrata, and Zillah). Councilmember Buckshnis asked what cities have a reduced rate. Mr. Young answered many cities discount the rate rather than phase it. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how the rate was reduced. Mr. Young answered there was no law or case law about how to make a reduction but all the rate categories must be reduced by the same percentage. Councilmember Peterson observed Mountlake Terrace only charges a park impact fee for businesses in the Town Center. He asked if the City could be divided into residential zones where the park impact fee would not be charged. Mr. Young answered yes, referring to RCW 82.02 that states the city shall identify one or more service areas for its impact fees. For example many cities divide their city into zones for a transportation impact fee. Edmonds could be divided into zones; there would need to be a rational basis for calculating the different rates. Another unintended consequence of creating too many zones is no zone collects enough to build a park. When a city is divided into zones, the funds collected must be used in the zone where they are collected. Councilmember Peterson asked whether the park impact fee could be less if there were incentives in the City's code for small units such as 700 square feet. Mr. Young answered the square footage data set is pretty thin other than the annual American Housing Survey (AHS). His proposal is very conservative; the highest defensible. The smallest size increment available from AHS data set is 1400 square feet which would mean any construction 1400 square feet and below would not pay the park impact fee. Councilmember Peterson asked if it was appropriate to be doing the PROS Plan update concurrently with a park impact fee study. Ms. Hite stated it is ideal to do them concurrently. The current PROS Plan does not identify future growth needs, only deficiencies. The PROS Plan update can address the current and future level of service. Councilmember Peterson asked if funds collected from a park impact fee could be used for a park anywhere in the City. Mr. Young explained the value per capita approach allows the funds to be used for Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 15 Packet Page 18 of 266 neighborhood, citywide or area -wide parks. Not adopting service area zones recognizes that residents/businesses use parks citywide. He summarized park impact fees are not based on actual use but accessibility/availability. Conversely transportation impact fees are based on actual use using data sets for individual land uses. Councilmember Peterson asked if a retail only zone could be exempted. Mr. Young replied the only way to exempt a zone is to never build another park in the zone or direct all grant funds to parks in that zone. Councilmember Johnson noted park impact fees could not address deficiencies. The Capital Facilities Plan includes approximately six projects with funding of $34 - 60 million in the 2019-2025 timeframe. She asked how that fit into a park impact fee. Mr. Young stated to meet the requirement to consider other funds, the City's short and long term planning documents and the funding mechanisms were considered. Councilmember Johnson advised all of the City's REET funds are dedicated to parks. She inquired the amount of capital funding that would be available if Parks Capital REET funds are excluded. Ms. Hite clarified REET 1 is not dedicated to parks, it is dedicated to City infrastructure and currently is paying for City Hall, Edmonds Center for the Arts, seismic upgrade at Frances Anderson Center, and debt service on Marina Beach. The remainder is used for City infrastructure. The first $750,000 of REET 2 is dedicated to parks; the remainder is dedicated to streets. Projects funded by the $750,000 Parks capital in the next six years include playground replacements, resurfacing basketball and tennis courts, trail improvements, tree removal and pruning, etc. In 2013, $500,000 is allocated to match a $500,000 State grant to revitalize City park with a spray pad, playground equipment, etc. Cutting those capital funds would have a very large impact on parks. Park impact fees are not intended to supplant those funds; they are for future growth. Mr. Young explained the 30% was determined by a precise analysis; Ms. Hite reviewed projects on the capital projects list to identify projects that add capacity and would be eligible for a park impact fee. The projects that were not eligible and the associated funding were not included in the calculation. The 30% is funds for projects that are capacity -adding. Ms. Hite provided an example of a project in the CFP that was included in the 30%, the Woodway Fields project, which adds capacity for the current, future and regional population. The first phase of that project is $4 million. Council President Petso asked whether Esperance was taken into account as it is in Edmonds' GMA planning area. Mr. Young answered the study considered current city limits only. Councilmember Buckshnis commented many citizens think the Port is responsible for the Edmonds Marsh when it is actually the City. She asked if park impact fees could be utilized to daylight Willow Creek or restoring the marsh. Ms. Hite replied the marsh rehab has been identified as a deficiency in the current system but it will also benefit future residents. She recalled a 50% factor was used for the marsh rehabilitation. She noted there was not a great deal of funding in the CFP for the marsh at this time. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the marsh study needed to be completed first. Ms. Hite agreed it did. Councilmember Bloom asked if there were other housing types that could be exempted from park impact fees such as green buildings. Mr. Young advised there are two specific authorized exemptions in the statute, low income housing and other broad public purposes. There is no case law or Hearing Examiner rulings regarding broad public purposes. A few cities are pushing the envelope but because he was conservative and did not want to put his clients at risk, he suggested having that conversation with the City Attorney. Mr. Taraday said he would generally agree. As a practical matter, because the City has to pay itself the impact fee for anything it chooses to exempt, the City cannot afford to push the envelope too far. The Council has a great deal of discretion regarding what it chooses to exempt via other broad public purposes. With regard to Esperance, Mr. Young explained typically studies are done on existing city limits. Olympia negotiated with Thurston County for a reciprocal impact fee outside their city limits. Following a recent annexation that increased their population by 40%, he suggested Kirkland talk to their City Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 16 Packet Page 19 of 266 Attorney about using the existing impact fee rates until a new study can be conducted. The other alternative would be a moratorium on building permits in the annexed area until a new study is conducted. Councilmember Johnson noted the Yost Pool project in the CFP has a range of $5 — 23 million and several other projects have ranges. There is also a $5 million placeholder in the CFP for an art museum. She asked how the lack of certainty in the CFP was considered. Mr. Young answered in the instances where there were ranges, he discussed with Ms. Hite whether to use the top or mid -point of the range. Councilmember Johnson suggested if the park impact fee is done concurrently with the PROS Plan, more certainty could be provided in those project estimates. Ms. Hite stated all the CFP projects will be reviewed including a public process to prioritize projects and to refine cost estimates. For example the aquatics study includes a range but the adopted preference is an $8 million project which was used in the park impact fee study. If the Council agreed a park impact fee had merit, Ms. Hite recommended scheduling a public hearing and she will prepare a draft ordinance. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested a Council committee review it first to discuss the six options. Council President Petso requested Councilmembers submit comments to Ms. Hite via email. If a consensus emerges from the comments, it can be scheduled for full Council. If there are conflicts, she will schedule review for Council committee. Mayor Earling announced Item 13 would be deferred to the May 7 meeting. He declared a brief recess. 12. DISCUSSION: SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE Senior Planner Kernen Lien explained his presentation tonight will focus on how the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) update affects single family development and the Meadowdale Marina. He described the SMP's relationship to other plans and regulations: • 24.10.030 — Relationship to Other Plans or Regulations o SMP is adopted element in Edmonds Comprehensive Plan o SMP works in tandem with rest of ECDC ■ Uses, developments, and activities must comply with ECDC and SMP ■ SMP prevails where there are conflicts He explained the draft SMP includes 11 shoreline environmental designations; of those 11, 3 are shoreline residential development: • Shoreline Residential I o North Edmonds east of railroad, RS-12 & RS-20 zoning • Shoreline Residential II o East of railroad, RS-6 zoning • Shoreline Residential III o Lake Ballinger, RSW-12 The main permit for shoreline is Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. • Single family residences is a preferred shoreline use (RCW 58.17.020) • Most single family developments exempt for shoreline substantial development permit process; however, • Single family development must still comply with the regulations within the SMP Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 17 Packet Page 20 of 266 He identified shoreline exemptions: • Single family residence and associate appurtenance • Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences Construction of a dock o < $2,500 in salt water o < $10,000 in freshwater Mr. Lien reviewed the following: • Residential Development ECDC 24.60.070: o New residential development must be consistent with Comprehensive Plan, zoning restrictions, and shoreline area designations o Public access must be considered with subdivision of four or more lots o Shared docks with subdivision of two or more lots Docks ECDC 24.50.030: o Prohibited substances o Not more than five feet above water o Not to exceed 25% of lot width o Located 10 feet from side property line o Shared docks can be located on a property line o No more than 400 square feet Shore Stabilization (Bulkheads) ECDC 24.50.020 o New development designed so bulkheads are not needed o Locate landward of ordinary high water mark o Soft methods preferred over hard methods Mr. Lien reviewed CAO integration: • 24.40.020 — Critical Areas • GMA vs. SMA • SMA rules within shoreline jurisdiction, CAO applies outside of shoreline jurisdiction • CAO Integration Options 1. Copy specific sections of CAO into SMP 2. Reference a specific CAO addition noting which CAO provisions will not apply to the SMP 3. Include portions of the CAO as an appendix to the SMP • City pursued options two and three • 24.40.020.D — CAO Exceptions o General provisions o Wetlands • 24.40.020.0 — CAO Provisions allowed with Shoreline variance Mr. Lien displayed and reviewed an image of Lake Ballinger. He provided the following information regarding wetlands: • Lake Ballinger ringed by wetlands • CAO Buffer (ECDC 23.50.040) o Category III = 50 feet o Category IV = 35 feet • SMP wetland buffers (ECDC 24.40.0201) o Category III = 60 feet base (+ 45 to 105 feet) o Category IV = 40 feet • Variance required to reduce buffer more than 25% Mr. Lien noted in addition to the above buffers, there is a 15-foot building setback. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 18 Packet Page 21 of 266 Councilmember Buckshnis asked how habitat is scoring. Mr. Lien advised it is contained in 24.40.020.F. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 1/2 HOUR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Lien commented on the bluff setback: • Standard setback is 50 feet plus 15 feet building setback • Shoreline variance required to build closer For Councilmember Bloom, Mr. Lien explained for a Category III wetland, the buffer would be a 60 foot base, and a habitat score of 20-30 would add another 45 feet for a total of a 105 foot wetland buffer. Councilmember Bloom asked how the habitat was scored. Mr. Lien answered it is done by a wetland biologist. The wetland biologist considers the hydrology, soils, and plants as well as the size of the wetland and the quality of the plant community to develop a habitat score. Councilmember Bloom asked how an applicant seeks a variance. Mr. Lien answered shoreline variances are approved by the Department of Ecology (DOE). The City would hold its process including review and decision by the Hearing Examiner which would be forwarded to the DOE. Shoreline substantial development permits do not require approval by DOE. Councilmember Bloom asked if that applied to only new construction. Mr. Lien answered staff's thinking was redevelopment within the developed footprint would be allowed such as in Harbor Square. If development is not allowed within the developed footprint and development must comply to adopted standards, that would apply to properties on Lake Ballinger as well as redevelopment at Harbor Square. When the SMP was drafted and staff consulted with DOE, the thought was and the way the SMP is drafted is redevelopment could occur within the developed footprint. Discussions with the City Attorney indicated the language in the SMP and COA may not be sufficient. Mr. Lien explained within the CAO, a buffer width reduction can be done without a variance process. Within the shoreline jurisdiction, the CAO does not rule, the SMP rules. Therefore a reduction of the buffer below 25% would require a variance process. When the regulations were drafted and the CAO was updated in 2004/2005, the intent was redevelopment could occur as long as it was in the developed permit. Best Available Science (BAS) for the CAO addresses development and developed footprint. When that language was transferred to code from BAS to CAO, it states additions to structures. If the interpretation is development cannot occur within the developed footprint, demolition and rebuilding would be required to meet the buffer setback. Councilmember Bloom asked if this was different or the same as Harbor Square. Mr. Lien replied with regard to development in the developed footprint, what applies here would apply to Harbor Square and vice versa. He clarified the intent was redevelopment could occur within the developed footprint. Mr. Taraday explained this is a policy question; staff is proposing a policy whereby redevelopment would be allowed in an existing footprint. He was uncertain the proposed language actually effectuates that policy choice. If that is the Council's policy choice, the language needs to be tightened. For Councilmember Bloom, Mr. Lien explained the standard in drafting the SMP is no net loss of ecological functions over the current conditions. Redevelopment within the previously developed footprint meets the standards of the SMA and the CAO. The intent when the SMP regulations were drafted was to allow redevelopment in the developed footprint. Some jurisdictions have used a straight setback and no buffers and DOE has indicated that meets the requirements of the SMA. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 19 Packet Page 22 of 266 Mr. Lien explained there was a change in the Shoreline designations from the existing SMP to the proposed SMP for Meadowdale Marina. The current shoreline designation of the Meadowdale Marina is Urban Mixed Use, the Comprehensive Plan designation is Mixed Use Commercial and the zoning is Commercial Waterfront, the same as the Port area. The proposed shoreline designation is Aquatic I. He provided the history of the shoreline designation: • Aquatic Environment — New environment consistent with SMP Guidelines (WAC 173-26) • Shoreline designation reviewed by TAC • TAC notes mention designating upland area associated with Haines Wharf as Urban Mixed Use • There are no upland areas associate with the site He described the two aquatic designations and identified areas on the waterfront and Lake Ballinger: • Aquatic I (Low Intensity) • Aquatic II (High Intensity) Mr. Lien described Meadowdale Marina Permitting: • Shoreline substantial development permit issued in 2005 (SM-05-94) to reconstruct pier • Two years to start, five years to finish project • Time begins other permits have been obtained • Other required permits: HPA, Army Corps, Railroad Crossing, Building Permits • SM-05-94 still a valid permit • Proposed change to SMP: Applicants have 5 years to obtain other require permits Mr. Lien summarized he hoped tonight would be the last work session on the SMP and a public hearing could be scheduled. Hearing no further questions, Mayor Earling suggested Mr. Lien work with Council President Petso to schedule a public hearing. 13. POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING DRAFT RESOLUTION ADOPTING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AS THE CITY COUNCIL'S NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE This item was deferred to the May 7 meeting. 14. REPORT ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS Councilmember Peterson reported members of the Lake Ballinger Forum had a successful trip to Washington DC with the lobbyist. They met with Senator Cantwell and Congressman Larsen regarding funding from the Water Resource Development Act to address flooding and water quality issues in Lake Ballinger. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported the main topic of the recent South County Cities meeting was outdoor recreation area plans for Monroe, Sultan and Gold Bar. In Monroe their stormwater runoff flows into manmade lakes; this summer wakeboarding will begin on the stormwater lakes. The meeting also included discussion regarding economic development in an industrial area in Monroe. She noted none of the buildings were over 35 feet; Monroe's City Manager indicated they did not find building heights over 35 feet necessary. Monroe's proposed City Hall will be taller and will combine offices for the city and the school district. Monroe is also attracting businesses; an electronic assembly business opening this summer will employ 350 people. Councilmember Buckshnis reported Snohomish County Tomorrow passed their GMA population targets for 2035. Woodway submitted a letter of objection because Pt. Wells which is within their MUGA was to provide a population of 1300. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 20 Packet Page 23 of 266 Councilmember Buckshnis reported Governor Inslee's budget includes $80 million for Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration funding. WRIA 8 recommended a study of the marsh. WRIA 8 is meeting with the technical committee on May 1 to discuss funding. Councilmember Yamamoto reported SnoCom is still in a formal dispute regarding the New World System. If resolution is not reached by July, it will advance to step 2 of 3. Councilmember Bloom reported on the April 17 Economic Development Commission meeting: • Update from the Technology Committee o Harbor Square has been wired o Avertec on 5"' Avenue will be served o Europe through the Back Door is extending fiber to their other building. o Edmonds Conference is being wired o Working to attract tech businesses o Developing a marketing strategy o Not focusing on the home market at this time due to the cost of wiring individual homes o An RFP/RFQ is being prepared for the half-time position to market fiber optics Strategic Plan o Strategic action items where the Port, Chamber and Senior Center are the lead have been forwarded to them o The Strategic Action Planning Committee will review and prioritize the actions o Discussed the EDC's role in implementation of the Plan including the EDC championing, monitoring or tracking progress on implementation o Discussed narrowing the list of actions that are pertinent to the EDC's mission such as revenue generating items o The subcommittee will form a list of priorities to discuss at the next meeting. • Tourism Update o Discussed Bed & Breakfasts in Edmonds and why there are so few o A report was given regarding casino gambling and a decision was made not to pursue it due to State law that allows cities to allow/prohibit gambling but not zone for gambling • Land Use Update o The subcommittee discussed land use incentives o Snohomish indicated a waiver of hotel/motel tax was not effective • Coal Train o EDC will continue to monitor but will not take a position • Communications Subgroup o The next meeting will focus on disseminating research done by the EDC and getting information into the public domain. Councilmember Bloom advised she has been asked to make a more extensive report to the Council regarding the EDC's work. With regard to the Tree Board, she encouraged citizens to apply for the two vacancies on the Tree Board. The April 27 Arbor Day celebration will include tree benefit tags hung on trees in downtown Edmonds. The Tree Board also plans to have a booth at the May 4 Garden Market. 15. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reported he went to Olympia last Friday along with Mayor Stephenson and Mayor Nearing in an attempt to get a broader array of Snohomish County transportation projects included in the House Transportation package. Representative Marko Liias was successful in passing an amendment that included several transportation projects including the $10 million Highway 99 Improvement project. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 21 Packet Page 24 of 266 16. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Buckshnis reported the Senior Center is holding its annual Health Fair on Friday, April 26 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. The Lions Club will provide free vision, hearing, glaucoma and diabetes screening. With regard to Item 3H on tonight's agenda, Councilmember Buckshnis reported Mr. Hertrich hung up on her when she asked him what 25 + 5 equals. She emphasized 25 + 5 = 30 feet; the height limit in the BD zones in downtown Edmonds has not been raised. The only change was to remove the 15-foot step -back. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested Mr. Taraday address Ms. Fimia's questions. Mr. Taraday explained RCW 43.21.C.420 does not apply; it is an optional process that involves adoption of a subarea plan as well as adoption of development regulations. Development regulations were not proposed at the time the Council was considering the Harbor Square subarea plan. That statute is intended to create a streamlined process for permitting transit oriented development whereby a city adopts a subarea plan as part of its Comprehensive Plan, adopts development regulations, does an EIS and informs the public to bring any SEPA appeals. The process in RCW 43.21.C.420 is an optional process that the City was not utilizing although some in the public believe the Council was required to utilize it. Councilmember Johnson reported the Garden Market begins on Saturday, May 4. 17. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). This item was removed from the agenda via action under Agenda Item 1. 18. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. This item was removed from the agenda via action under Agenda Item 1. 19. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 22 Packet Page 25 of 266 AM-5719 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time• Consent Submitted For: Ronald Cone Department: Finance Review Committee: Type: Action Tnfnrmntinn Submitted By: 3. B. Nori Jacobson Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Subject Title Approval of claim checks #201718 through #201827 dated April 25, 2013 for $448,428.83 and claim checks #201828 through #201947 dated May 2, 2013 for $492,863.38. Approval of payroll direct deposit & checks #60161 through #60177 for $443,836.54, benefit checks #60178 through #60189 and wire payments of $194,877.67 for the period April 16, 2013 through April 30, 2013. Recommendation Approval of claim, payroll and benefit direct deposit, checks and wire payments. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non -approval of expenditures. Fiscal Year: Revenue• Expenditure• Fiscal Impact: Claims $941,292.21 2013 1,580,006.42 Fiscal Impact Payroll Employee checks and direct deposit $443,836.54 Payroll Benefit checks and wire payments $194,877.67 Total Payroll $638,714.21 Attachments claim cks 04-25-13 Packet Page 26 of 266 claim cks 05-02-13 Project Numbers 05-02-13 Payroll Benefit 04-30-13 Payroll Summary 04-30-13 Inbox Reviewed By Finance Ronald Cone City Clerk Linda Hynd Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Linda Hynd Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Final Approval Date: 05/03/2013 Form Review Date 05/02/2013 02:37 PM 05/02/2013 02:39 PM 05/03/2013 08:22 AM 05/03/2013 08:35 AM Started On: 05/02/2013 08:15 AM Packet Page 27 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201718 4/25/2013 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC CR27152MAR12 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 1,098.65 CR29754MAR13 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 1,490.38 Total: 2,589.03 201719 4/25/2013 069798 A.M. LEONARD INC CI13049455 BROOMS AND SCOOP BROOMS AND SCOOP 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 166.80 Freight 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 8.00 C 113050944 BROOMS BROOMS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 195.70 Freight 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 72.00 Total : 442.50 201720 4/25/2013 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 318597 WWTP- MONTHLY PEST CONTROL WWTP- MONTHLY PEST CONTROL 423.000.76.535.80.41.23 73.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.23 6.94 Total : 79.94 201721 4/25/2013 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 413555 PICKLEBALL SHIRTS PICKLEBALL SHIRTS 001.000.64.575.52.31.00 41.23 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.575.52.31.00 3.92 Total : 45.15 201722 4/25/2013 001528 AM TEST INC 74968 WWTP - MERCURY BY CVAA; ICP k Page: 1 Packet Page 28 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201722 4/25/2013 001528 AM TEST INC (Continued) WWTP - MERCURY BY CVAA; ICP k 423.000.76.535.80.41.31 75.00 Total: 75.00 201723 4/25/2013 069829 AMIDO, BENJAMIM AMIDO 16499 UKULELE 16499 UKULELE 16499 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 154.00 Total: 154.00 201724 4/25/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6761594 UNIFORM RENTALS UNIFORM RENTALS 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 88.77 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 8.43 Total: 97.20 201725 4/25/2013 069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES 00130593 Fire Stations - Water Qaulity 50/50 Fire Stations - Water Qaulity 50/50 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 122.25 Fire Stations - Water Qaulity 50/50 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 122.25 Freight 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.60 Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 5.60 Total: 255.70 201726 4/25/2013 073643 AUTOLINE CONTROLS INC 313386 WWTP - HYPO MOORE CONTROLL WWTP - HYPO MOORE CONTROLL 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 3,598.08 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 341.82 Total: 3,939.90 201727 4/25/2013 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 69162 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS Page: 2 Packet Page 29 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201727 4/25/2013 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER (Continued) UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 90.52 UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 90.52 UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 93.25 UB Outsourcing area #100 Postage 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 312.48 UB Outsourcing area #100 Postage 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 312.47 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 8.60 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 8.60 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 8.86 Total: 925.30 201728 4/25/2013 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST 122 L 052013 MAYAWC PREMIUMS May 2013 AWC Premiums 811.000.231.510 55,920.65 Total: 55,920.65 201729 4/25/2013 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 0696448-IN Fleet Auto Propane Inventory 450 Ga Fleet Auto Propane Inventory 450 Ga 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 740.65 Total: 740.65 201730 4/25/2013 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 992290 INV 992290 EDMONDS PD - FALK SHORT SLEEVE UNIFORM SHIRTS 001.000.41.521.71.24.00 203.85 SEW NAMETAGS ON SHIRTS 001.000.41.521.71.24.00 3.00 NAMETAGS FOR SHIRTS 001.000.41.521.71.24.00 14.85 Page: 3 Packet Page 30 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201730 4/25/2013 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.71.24.00 21.06 996258 INV 996258 EDMONDS PD - PLOEG BELT KEEPER WITH HIDDEN SNAP 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 14.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 1.42 Total: 259.13 201731 4/25/2013 074229 BONNIE AUBUCHON AUBUCHON 16456 PAINTING 16456 PAINTING 16456 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 227.50 Total: 227.50 201732 4/25/2013 066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL 14189829 WWTP-WTP ON -CALL SERVICE, PF WWTP-WTP ON -CALL SERVICE, PF 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 913.25 Total: 913.25 201733 4/25/2013 072571 BUILDERS EXCHANGE 1036798 E3JA & WWTP PUBLISH BID DOCS E3JA.Publish Bid docs 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 47.85 WWTP Publish Bid Docs (c385) 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 52.95 Total: 100.80 201734 4/25/2013 074387 CAMPBELL NELSON NISSAN 154315 INV 154315 CUST # 108160 EDMOP KEY FOR NISSAN - CASE 13-1300 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 88.00 CUTAND PROGRAM KEY FOR NIS: 001.000.41.521.80.41.00 69.95 SHOP CHARGE 001.000.41.521.80.41.00 4.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 8.37 Page: 4 Packet Page 31 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201734 4/25/2013 074387 CAMPBELL NELSON NISSAN (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.80.41.00 7.11 Total: 178.33 201735 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12686854 EQUIPMENT RENTAL IRC50510 EQUIPMENT RENTAL IRC50510 001.000.64.571.21.45.00 249.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.45.00 23.75 12686858 PARKS AND REC RENTAL 10301F PARKS AND REC RENTAL 10301F 001.000.64.571.21.45.00 27.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.45.00 2.66 12688862 PARKS MAINT IRC10301F PARKS MAINT IRC10301F 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 33.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 3.14 Total: 340.55 201736 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12688858 C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 001-05721 Finance dept copier contract charge 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 249.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 23.75 Total: 273.74 201737 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12686849 CANON CONTRACT CHARGES C10 Contract charges for the C1030 001.000.61.519.70.45.00 9.33 Contract charges for the C1030 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 9.33 Contract charges for the C1030 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 9.33 Page: 5 Packet Page 32 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 6 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201737 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.61.519.70.45.00 0.89 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 0.89 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 0.88 Total: 30.65 201738 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12686853 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE COPIER LEE Lease City Clerk's Office copier 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 466.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 44.36 12686855 RECEPTIONIST DESK COPIER LEA Recept. desk copier lease 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 20.11 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 1.91 Total: 533.35 201739 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12688859 FLEET COPIER Fleet Copier 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 33.02 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 3.14 12688860 PW ADMIN COPIER PW Office Copier for 001.000.65.519.91.45.00 68.55 PW Office Copier for 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 38.85 PW Office Copier for 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 38.85 PW Office Copier for 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 27.42 PW Office Copier for Page: 6 Packet Page 33 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 7 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201739 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES (Continued) 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 27.42 PW Office Copier for 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 27.41 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.519.91.45.00 6.51 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 3.69 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 3.69 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 2.61 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 2.61 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 2.59 12688861 WATER SEWER COPIER Water Sewer Copier 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 70.68 Water Sewer Copier 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 70.68 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 6.72 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 6.71 Total: 441.15 201740 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12686848 Lease Council Office copier/printer Lease Council Office copier/printer 001.000.11.511.60.45.00 30.65 Total: 30.65 201741 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12686857 Bldg Div Copier/Printer Lease Bldg Div Copier/Printer Lease 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 36.16 Page: 7 Packet Page 34 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 8 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201741 4/25/2013 073029 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES (Continued) Total: 36.16 201742 4/25/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12686852 INV 12686852 CUST #572105 EDMC MONTHLY COPIER RENTAL (4) 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 581.60 COPY CHARGES 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 232.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 77.31 Total: 890.93 201743 4/25/2013 003320 CASCADE MACHINERY & ELECTRIC 393634 Sewer - Fan Cover (wrong one, returr Sewer - Fan Cover (wrong one, returr 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 176.25 Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 18.26 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 18.48 398561 Sewer - Fan Cover Returned for Cred Sewer - Fan Cover Returned for Cred 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 -176.25 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 -16.74 Total: 20.00 201744 4/25/2013 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY 192878 WWTP - SUPPLIES WWTP - SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 369.22 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 35.09 Tota I : 404.31 201745 4/25/2013 065682 CHS ENGINEERS LLC 451202-1303 E3GA.SERVICES THRU MARCH 201 E3GA.Services thru March 2013 423.000.75.594.35.41.30 8,612.01 Total: 8,612.01 Page: 8 Packet Page 35 of 266 vchlist 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 9 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201746 4/25/2013 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD M&O MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEA MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEI 423.000.75.535.80.47.20 27,602.00 Total: 27,602.00 201747 4/25/2013 074255 COAL CREEK ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOC 120902-04 W WTP - TECH ASSIST FOR AIR EM W WTP - TECH ASSIST FOR AIR EM 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 650.00 Total: 650.00 201748 4/25/2013 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2540412 HEPASTAT H EPASTAT 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 39.72 Freight 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 5.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 4.25 W2540610 AUTO SPRAY AUTO SPRAY 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 108.87 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.34 W2543192 ECOGREEN PLY, HAND SOAP ECOGREEN PLY, HAND SOAP 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 679.31 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 64.53 Total: 912.02 201749 4/25/2013 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2542009 Fac Maint - Gum Remover, TT, Towel Fac Maint - Gum Remover, TT, Towel 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 425.28 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 40.40 Total: 465.68 Page: 9 Packet Page 36 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 10 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201750 4/25/2013 074382 CONTECH ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS IN00015732 Storm -Catch All Basket Assembly Storm -Catch All Basket Assembly 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 2,240.16 8.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 192.65 Total: 2,432.81 201751 4/25/2013 072848 COPIERS NW INV847069 MAINT ON COPIER MAINT ON COPIER 001.000.23.523.30.48.00 12.76 Total: 12.76 201752 4/25/2013 072577 CORE CREATIVE TEAM 2013 CONCERT FLYERS 2013 CONCERT FLYERS 2013 CONCERT FLYERS 117.100.64.573.20.49.00 690.00 Total: 690.00 201753 4/25/2013 073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 329823 E1CA.SERVICES THRU 3/16/13 E1CA.Services thru 3/16/13 112.200.68.595.33.41.00 5,210.55 Total: 5,210.55 201754 4/25/2013 073757 DEX MEDIA WEST INC 651150804 CEMETERY AD CEMETERY AD 130.000.64.536.20.44.00 35.25 Total: 35.25 201755 4/25/2013 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 13-3354 MINUTE TAKER 1ST QUARTER ECC Minute taking for Economic Developn 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 384.00 Total: 384.00 201756 4/25/2013 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 13-3355 MINUTE TAKING 4/9-4/16 Council Minutes 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 363.00 Total: 363.00 Page: 10 Packet Page 37 of 266 vchlist 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 11 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201757 4/25/2013 074389 DRAKE, BARB 2013 UNIFORM WORK PANTS UNIFORM CREDIT WORK PANTS UNIFORM CREDIT 001.000.64.574.35.24.00 60.00 TRAVEL TO SCHOOLS 001.000.64.574.35.43.00 19.22 Tota I : 79.22 201758 4/25/2013 060933 DYNAMIC LANGUAGE CENTER 291621 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 151.42 Total: 151.42 201759 4/25/2013 074302 EDMONDS HARDWARE & PAINT LLC 04/15/2013 FLASHLIGHT AND COMPNUT FLASHLIGHT AND COMPNUT 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 42.79 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.06 417 MAGNETIC TRAY MAGNETIC TRAY 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 21.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.09 Tota I : 70.92 201760 4/25/2013 008410 EDMONDS PRINTING CO R24026 Water - Blue Door Hangers (1500) Water - Blue Door Hangers (1500) 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 183.00 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 17.39 Total: 200.39 201761 4/25/2013 060983 EDMONDS SO SNO CO HISTORICAL MEMBERSHIP CEMETERY MEMBERSHIP RENWEAL MEMBERSHIP RENWEAL 130.000.64.536.20.49.00 75.00 Total: 75.00 Page: 11 Packet Page 38 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 12 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201762 4/25/2013 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00575 CITY PARK CITY PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 77.14 1-00825 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROON BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROON 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 516.41 1-00875 SPRINKLER SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-02125 CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-03710 290 MAIN STREET 290 MAIN STREET 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-03900 SPRINKLER SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-05125 SPRINKLER SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-05285 GAZEBO IRRIGATION GAZEBO IRRIGATION 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-05340 CORNER PARK CORNER PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-05650 EDMONDS CITY PARK EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-05675 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 568.69 1-05700 EDMONDS CITY PARK EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 Page: 12 Packet Page 39 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 13 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201762 4/25/2013 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION (Continued) 1-09650 CORNER PARK CORNER PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-09800 SW CORNER SPRINKLER SW CORNER SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-10780 PLANTER PLANTER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-16130 CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-16300 CORNER PARKS CORNER PARKS 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-16420 118 5TH AVE N 118 5TH AVE N 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-16450 CITY HALL TRIANGLE CITY HALL TRIANGLE 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 38.02 1-16630 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-17475 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 1-19950 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD PINE STREE PLAYFIELD 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 64.89 1-36255 1141 9TH AVE S 1141 9TH AVE S 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 Total : 1,837.37 Page: 13 Packet Page 40 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 14 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201763 4/25/2013 074392 ELECTRIC LEAGUE OF THE PAC NW 10224880 WWTP - REGISTRATION FOR RAN[ WWTP - REGISTRATION FOR RAN[ 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 150.00 Total: 150.00 201764 4/25/2013 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 0861381 CUST# MK5533 C5051 GQM52286 C Meter charges 01 /06/13 - 02/06/13 B! 001.000.31.514.23.48.00 36.07 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.48.00 3.43 Total: 39.50 201765 4/25/2013 047407 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 312 000 093 000 ES REF # 94513310 7 Q1-2013 Unemployment Insurance 001.000.39.517.78.23.00 9,503.15 Total: 9,503.15 201766 4/25/2013 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 0088964-IN INV 0088964-IN ACCT 0011847 EDM REFINISH SGT. HAT BADGE 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 30.00 REFINISH 2 OFFICER BADGES 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 60.00 REFINISH&REMOVE # PANEL - 4 OI 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 216.00 PACKAGE INSURANCE 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 4.50 MATERIALS FEE 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 4.50 Freight 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 10.50 Total : 325.50 201767 4/25/2013 009880 FEDEX 2-238-36290 WWTP - RETURN EQUIPMENT TO I WWTP - RETURN EQUIPMENT TO P 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 4.03 Page: 14 Packet Page 41 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 15 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201767 4/25/2013 009880 009880 FEDEX (Continued) Total: 4.03 201768 4/25/2013 011900 FRONTIER 253-017-8148 CITY PARK T1 LINE City Park T1 Line 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 407.50 Total: 407.50 201769 4/25/2013 074358 GEO-TEST SERVICES 27915 E9GA.SERVICES THRU MARCH 20' E9GA.Services thru March 20131S 4 423.000.75.594.35.41.30 1,175.00 27948 E9GA.SERVICES THRU 3/31/13.LAE E9GA.Services thru 3/31/13.Lab Sery 423.000.75.594.35.41.30 780.00 27949 E9GA.SERVICES THRU MARCH 20' E9GA.Services thru March 20131S 4 423.000.75.594.35.41.30 595.00 Total: 2,550.00 201770 4/25/2013 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 110307 Unit 50 - 2 Tires Unit 50 - 2 Tires 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 252.62 State Tire Fee 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 24.00 Total: 278.62 201771 4/25/2013 012199 GRAINGER 9112360830 PS - V Belts PS - V Belts 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.61 9113340559 Unit 2 - Aluminum Side Truck Boxes Unit 2 - Aluminum Side Truck Boxes 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 940.00 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 15 Packet Page 42 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 16 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201771 4/25/2013 012199 GRAINGER (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 89.30 Total: 1,036.51 201772 4/25/2013 074390 HARSHMAN, GARY UNIFORM 2013 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 2013 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 2013 001.000.64.574.35.24.00 59.71 TRAVEL TO SCHOOLS 001.000.64.574.35.43.00 19.22 Total: 78.93 201773 4/25/2013 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 2040678 PAINT PAINT 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 193.76 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 18.41 2040682 TOOL COMBO TOOL COMBO 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 269.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 25.56 3047056 PAINT PAINT 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 82.57 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 7.84 3047058 COVERALL COVERALL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 81.43 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 7.74 4031945 GRAVEL GRAVEL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 22.08 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.10 Page: 16 Packet Page 43 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 17 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201773 4/25/2013 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 45691 REBAR REBAR 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 23.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.27 6095254 OC POTTING OC POTTING 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 9.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 0.95 Total: 747.58 201774 4/25/2013 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2262287 WWTP - OFFICE SUPPLIES WWTP - OFFICE SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 24.50 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 2.32 Total: 26.82 201775 4/25/2013 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2232988 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.512.50.31.00 118.26 Total: 118.26 201776 4/25/2013 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2266310 STAPLES, COPY PAPER, LETTER C Staples, Letter Opener & Copy Machi 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 253.62 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 24.09 Total: 277.71 201777 4/25/2013 071634 INTEGRATELECOM 10793431 C/A768328 PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 1,983.57 Tourism Toll free lines 877.775.6929; Page: 17 Packet Page 44 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 18 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201777 4/25/2013 071634 INTEGRATELECOM (Continued) 001.000.61.558.70.42.00 32.87 Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines 001.000.61.558.70.42.00 32.99 Total: 2,049.43 201778 4/25/2013 065980 ISS WONDERWARE 403206 WWTP - CONTROL SYSTEM UPGRj WWTP - CONTROL SYSTEM UPGRj 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 3,609.95 9.5% Sales Tax 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 342.95 Total: 3,952.90 201779 4/25/2013 015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 577845 WWTP - HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTIO WWTP - HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTIO 423.000.76.535.80.31.53 2,655.15 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.53 250.48 Total: 2,905.63 201780 4/25/2013 072728 KAVADAS, JANET KAVADAS 16746 PERSONAL TRAINER PERSONAL TRAINER 001.000.64.575.54.41.00 28.00 WEIGHT ROOM ORIENTAION 001.000.64.575.54.41.00 10.50 Total: 38.50 201781 4/25/2013 074415 LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMER Ref000251478 LI Refund Cst #00221931 LI Refund Cst #00221931 001.000.257.310 125.00 Total: 125.00 201782 4/25/2013 073603 LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC 20109 expenses 02-13 EXPENSES 02-13 reimbursement for expenses - 001.000.36.515.31.41.00 15.00 Total: 15.00 Page: 18 Packet Page 45 of 266 vchlist 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 19 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201783 4/25/2013 074388 LONE MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS 12460 INV 12460 EDMONDS PD REPAIR MTS2000 RADIO 466CDSOE 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 75.00 12461 INV 12461 EDMONDS PD REPAIR MTS2000 RADIO 466CDSOE 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 75.00 12462 INV 12462 EDMONDS PD REPAIR MTS2000 RADIO 466CDSOE 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 117.80 INV 12463 INV 12463 EDMONDS PD REPAIR MTS2000 RADIO 446CDSOE 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 75.00 Total: 342.80 201784 4/25/2013 074395 LUDECA INC 106528 WWTP REPAIR OF EDDYTHERM 1} WWTP REPAIR OF EDDYTHERM 1} 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 323.31 Total: 323.31 201785 4/25/2013 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 825259 SEAL SEAL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 46.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.45 825593 LAWN MOWER PARTS LAWN MOWER PARTS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 118.64 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 11.27 Total: 181.16 201786 4/25/2013 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 1218 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 88.32 1219 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE Page: 19 Packet Page 46 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 20 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201786 4/25/2013 069362 MARSHALL, CITA (Continued) 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 88.32 1220 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 88.32 1221 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 88.32 Total: 353.28 201787 4/25/2013 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 49786544 WWTP - MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES WWTP - MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 247.84 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 28.92 Total: 276.76 201788 4/25/2013 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 165048 GLOVES GLOVES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 33.12 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.15 Total: 36.27 201789 4/25/2013 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 159657 Water- Parts Water - Parts 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 196.75 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 18.69 Total: 215.44 201790 4/25/2013 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0344357-IN WWTP - IN VAL CUP VENTIS WWTP - IN VAL CUP VENTIS 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 7.00 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 11.80 Page: 20 Packet Page 47 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 21 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201790 4/25/2013 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 1.79 Total: 20.59 201791 4/25/2013 024001 NC POWER SYSTEMS CO SECS0560029 Unit 63 - Wheel, Valve Unit 63 - Wheel, Valve 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 588.32 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 55.89 Total: 644.21 201792 4/25/2013 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-643087 RENTALS MARINA BEACH RENTALS MARINA BEACH 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 1,007.20 1-643089 RENTALS CIVIC CENTER RENTALS CIVIC CENTER 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 112.35 1-643283 RENTALS PINE STREET PARK RENTALS PINE STREET PARK 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 112.35 1-643811 WILLOW CREEK WILLOW CREEK 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 112.35 1-643812 MADORNA RENTALS MADORNA RENTALS 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 102.50 1-643813 SIERRA PARK RENTALS SIERRA PARK RENTALS 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 112.35 1-643814 EDMONDS ELEMENTARY RENTALS EDMONDS ELEMENTARY RENTALS 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 112.35 Total: 1,671.45 201793 4/25/2013 074028 NORTHWEST PLAN SERVICES INC 13-0430 ACTUARIAL VALUATION NON-LEOF Page: 21 Packet Page 48 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 22 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201793 4/25/2013 074028 NORTHWEST PLAN SERVICES INC (Continued) Actuarial Valuation for Non-Leoff Fire 617.000.51.522.20.41.00 1,169.35 Actuarial Valuation for Non-Leoff Fire 009.000.39.517.37.41.00 6,080.65 Total: 7,250.00 201794 4/25/2013 073522 NW HYDRAULIC CONSULTANTS INC 16762 E3FB.SERVICES THRU 3/31/13 E3FB.Services thru 3/31/13 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 1,116.81 Total: 1,116.81 201795 4/25/2013 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 393620 PAPER, OFFICE SUPPLIES PAPER, OFFICE SUPPLIES 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 30.93 PLASTIC TUB 117.100.64.573.20.31.00 4.66 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 2.94 9.5% Sales Tax 117.100.64.573.20.31.00 0.44 412654 2X2 SQUARE LABELS 2X2 SQUARE LABELS 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 18.10 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 1.72 Total: 58.79 201796 4/25/2013 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 318044 OFFICE SUPPLIES Office Supplies 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 94.76 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 9.00 Total: 103.76 201797 4/25/2013 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 256039 INV 256039 ACCT 520437 250POL E Page: 22 Packet Page 49 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 23 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201797 4/25/2013 063511 OFFICE MAX INC (Continued) INVISIBLE TAPE 12-PACK 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 11.13 2x4-1/2 COPIER LABELS 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 137.10 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 1.06 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 13.01 Total: 162.30 201798 4/25/2013 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC 2320 YOST POOL TILE REPAIR YOST POOL TILE REPAIR 125.000.64.576.80.48.00 8,675.80 9.5% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.48.00 824.20 2439 YOST POOL SUPPLIES YOST POOL SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2,280.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 216.65 Total: 11,997.15 201799 4/25/2013 074393 OTTER, KAREN OTTER 04182013 REFUND INSUFFIECIENT REGISTR REFUND INSUFFIECIENT REGISTR 001.000.239.200 26.00 Total: 26.00 201800 4/25/2013 066833 PAC NW PUBLIC FLEET MGRS ASSOC 701 Annual Mbr Dues Fees - M Adams Annual Mbr Dues Fees - M Adams 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 120.00 Total: 120.00 201801 4/25/2013 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC. 954023035777 FS 20 - Paint Supplies FS 20 - Paint Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 22.94 Page: 23 Packet Page 50 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 24 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201801 4/25/2013 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC. (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.18 954023035778 City Hall - Project - Supplies City Hall - Project - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 136.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 13.01 954023035865 PS - Paint PS - Paint 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 24.67 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.34 Total: 202.09 201802 4/25/2013 063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC 20110010.00-20 E7AC.SERVICES THRU 3/31/13 E7AC.Services thru 3/31/13 112.200.68.595.33.41.00 11,606.54 Total: 11,606.54 201803 4/25/2013 068411 PHILLIPS 66 - CONOCO 76 683 Fleet- Fuel Charges Fleet- Fuel Charges 511.000.77.548.68.34.11 33.14 Total: 33.14 201804 4/25/2013 064735 PNWS - AWWA 1 WWTP - WEST WASHINGTON SHO WWTP - WEST WASHINGTON SHO 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 950.00 Total: 950.00 201805 4/25/2013 073231 POLYDYNE INC 795442 WWTP - POLYMER WWTP - POLYMER 423.000.76.535.80.31.51 8,184.00 Total: 8,184.00 201806 4/25/2013 074342 PROTHMAN COMPANY 2013-3869 Interim Finance Director billing Page: 24 Packet Page 51 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 25 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201806 4/25/2013 074342 PROTHMAN COMPANY (Continued) Interim Finance Director billing 001.000.31.514.20.41.00 6,532.26 Total: 6,532.26 201807 4/25/2013 061540 REPUBLIC SERVICES #197 0197-001573237 WWTP - RECYCLE/ENVIRO RECO\j WWTP - RECYCLE/ENVIRO RECO\v 423.000.76.535.80.47.66 12.64 Total: 12.64 201808 4/25/2013 069593 SAFELITE FULFILLMENT INC 00446-619749 Unit 447 - Repairs Unit 447 - Repairs 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 145.53 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 13.83 Total: 159.36 201809 4/25/2013 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 03-218178 Unit 338 - Battery Unit 338 - Battery 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 92.48 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 8.79 03-218653 Unit 90 - Brake Pads and Rotors Unit 90 - Brake Pads and Rotors 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 123.42 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 11.72 03-218879 Unit 30 - Battery Unit 30 - Battery 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 76.80 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 7.30 03-219091 Unit 86 - Belts Unit 86 - Belts 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 70.51 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 25 Packet Page 52 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 26 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201809 4/25/2013 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.70 03-219354 Unit 535 - Battery Unit 535 - Battery 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 81.23 Unit 649 - Battery 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 82.56 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 15.56 03-220109 Unit 332 - V Belt, Battery Unit 332 - V Belt, Battery 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 100.02 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.50 03-220890 Unit 776 - Water Pump Unit 776 - Water Pump 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 79.89 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 7.59 03-221521 Unit 449 - Trans Oil Unit 449 - Trans Oil 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 56.40 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.36 03-221547 Unit 449 - Trans Oil Unit 449 - Trans Oil 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 56.40 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.36 05-458254 Fleet - Returns - Belt, Filter, B Pads Fleet - Returns - Belt, Filter, B Pads 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -94.98 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -9.02 Total: 793.59 Page: 26 Packet Page 53 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 27 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201810 4/25/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2004-9314-6 19827 89TH PL WEST 19827 89TH PL WEST 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.86 Total: 31.86 201811 4/25/2013 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO May 2013 Standard MAY 2013 STANDARD INSURANCE May 2013 Standard Insurance PreMiL 811.000.231.550 13,683.09 Total: 13,683.09 201812 4/25/2013 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S100487892.001 Fac Maint - Supplies Fac Maint - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 28.39 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.70 S100490279.001 Fac Maint - Photo Controls Supplies Fac Maint - Photo Controls Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 58.77 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.58 Total: 95.44 201813 4/25/2013 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18000926 WWTP - STEEL RETAINING RINGS WWTP - STEEL RETAINING RINGS 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 3.53 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 0.34 Total: 3.87 201814 4/25/2013 071666 TETRATECH INC 50666833 WWTP - PSA- ON -CALL SERVICES WWTP - PSA - ON -CALL SERVICES 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 7,786.58 Total: 7,786.58 201815 4/25/2013 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 0001815581 WWTP - SWITCHGEAR LINE-UP Bll WWTP - SWITCHGEAR LINE-UP Bll Page: 27 Packet Page 54 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 28 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201815 4/25/2013 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY (Continued) 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 168.56 Total: 168.56 201816 4/25/2013 027269 THE PART WORKS INC 357024 Library - Toilet Library - Toilet 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 103.84 Freight 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9.28 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.75 Total: 123.87 201817 4/25/2013 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 19772 PW - Keys, Supplies PW - Keys, Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 22.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.14 Total: 24.64 201818 4/25/2013 073284 UNITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE CO 0031138902 MAY UHC PREMIUMS May 2013 UHC Premiums plus premi 811.000.231.511 209,639.49 Total: 209,639.49 201819 4/25/2013 063543 URBAN LAND INSTITUTE 1542041 2013 Membership Chave Urban Land 2013 Membership Chave Urban Land 001.000.62.558.60.49.00 112.50 2013 Membership Clifton Urban Land 001.000.61.558.70.49.00 112.50 Total: 225.00 201820 4/25/2013 062693 US BANK 2985 MULTIPLE PURCHASES EMERGENCY LIGHTS / REPAIRS 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 533.27 WASTEWATER TREATMENT TROUI Page: 28 Packet Page 55 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 29 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201820 4/25/2013 062693 US BANK (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 99.08 ALL ACCESS PASS FOR WASTEWP 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 2,786.00 Total: 3,418.35 201821 4/25/2013 062693 US BANK 2813 OReilly Auto - Fleet - Return Brake s OReilly Auto - Fleet - Return Brake 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -361.67 2813 OReilly - Fleet - Brake Parts - See OReilly - Fleet - Brake Parts - See 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 361.67 Office Max - Office Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 9.30 OReilly - Unit 90 - Hub Assembly 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 349.84 High Sierra Antenna - Antenna Suppli 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 22.39 Heartland Svc - Unit 400 - Key 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 45.00 OReilly - Unit 66 - Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 36.64 OReilly - Unit 338 - Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 4.75 3355 Shopblt - Street Storm - IPad Cases E Shopblt - Street Storm - IPad Cases E 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 220.70 Shopblt - Street Storm - IPad Cases E 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 220.70 Autoloc Transport Sys - Paint Machine 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 171.90 Apple App - IPad App for Plan Revieo 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 10.94 Apple App - IPad App for Weather/Ra 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 3.27 Page: 29 Packet Page 56 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 30 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201821 4/25/2013 062693 US BANK Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) PayPal - Dig Safe Cert Course - 3- C 111.000.68.542.90.49.00 90.00 PayPal - Dig Safe Cert Course - 3- C 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 180.00 Super 8 - Stay for Class - M Brown 422.000.72.531.90.43.00 213.75 Super 8 - Stay for Class - B Clemens 422.000.72.531.90.43.00 208.86 3355 Super 8 - Reveresed Safe Warranty Super 8 - Reveresed Safe Warranty 422.000.72.531.90.43.00 -4.89 3405 Fac Maint - Ordered Mono Attenuato Fac Maint - Ordered Mono Attenuato 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 71.99 MCM Elect - FS 16 - Volume Control 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 93.46 NEEC - Cert Renewal - D Housler 001.000.66.518.30.49.00 55.00 NEEC - Cert Renewal - D Startzman 001.000.66.518.30.49.00 55.00 NEEC - BOC Cert Renewal - L LaFav 001.000.66.518.30.49.00 165.00 Guardian Sec- Mar 2013 - Old PW 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 55.00 Guardian Sec - Apr 2013 - Old PW 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 55.00 3405 Fac Maint - Credit for Cancelled Orde Fac Maint - Credit for Cancelled Orde 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 -71.99 3546 Am PW - PW Week Poster Am PW - PW Week Poster 001.000.65.519.91.31.00 23.00 Apple - PW- AppleTV for Conf 001.000.65.519.91.31.00 108.41 Page: 30 Packet Page 57 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 31 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201821 4/25/2013 062693 US BANK (Continued) Apple -PW - USB Cables 001.000.65.519.91.31.00 83.24 Amazon.com- Water/Sewer - Straps f 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 57.47 Amazon.com- Water/Sewer - Straps f 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 57.46 Sewer - Rat Bate Blocks for Line Bate 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 404.06 Part 1- Verizon Wrls - Street Storm - 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 82.07 Part 1- Verizon Wrls - Street Storm - 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 82.07 Part 2 - Verizon Wrls - Water Sewer - 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 65.66 Part 2 - Verizon Wrls - Water Sewer - 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 65.65 Verizon Wrls - Water Sewer - IPhone 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 180.58 Verizon Wrls - Water Sewer - IPhone 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 180.56 Total: 3,651.84 201822 4/25/2013 062693 US BANK 4/8/13 Eng Tech III posting - Craigslist Eng Tech III posting - Craigslist 001.000.22.518.10.44.00 50.00 Finance Director posting - Craigslist 001.000.22.518.10.44.00 50.00 Finance Director ad GFOA 001.000.22.518.10.44.00 150.00 Finance Director ad ICMA 001.000.22.518.10.44.00 222.75 Indeed Advertising IS Supervisor 001.000.22.518.10.44.00 4.37 Total: 477.12 Page: 31 Packet Page 58 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 32 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201823 4/25/2013 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WP 0473412-WA 0473412-WAACCT 001447 CITY OF RESPIRATOR FIT TEST QUESTIONI 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 32.00 Total: 32.00 201824 4/25/2013 074394 VERDUZCO, ADRIANA VERDUZCO 04152013 DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND 001.000.239.200 500.00 Total: 500.00 201825 4/25/2013 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 9703131270 C/A671247844-00001 Cell Service -Bldg 001.000.62.524.20.42.00 70.72 Cell Service-Eng 001.000.67.532.20.42.00 174.97 Cell Service Fac-Maint 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 71.48 Cell Service -Parks Discovery Prograr 001.000.64.574.35.42.00 13.40 Cell Service Parks Maint 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 68.25 Cell Service-PD 001.000.41.521.22.42.00 369.95 Cell Service-PD 104 Fund 104.000.41.521.21.42.00 188.13 Cell Service-PW Street 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 27.05 Cell Service-PW Storm 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 15.54 Cell Service-PW Street/Storm 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 40.20 Cell Service-PW Street/Storm 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 40.20 Cell Service-PW Water 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 175.05 Cell Service-PW Sewer Page: 32 Packet Page 59 of 266 vchlist 04/25/2013 7:48:10AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 33 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201825 4/25/2013 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS (Continued) 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 63.97 Cell Service-WWTP 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 40.22 Total: 1,359.13 201826 4/25/2013 069836 VOLT SERVICE GROUP 29080291 WWTP - PART-TIME OFFICE CLERH WWTP - PART-TIME OFFICE CLERH 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 525.46 Total: 525.46 201827 4/25/2013 049905 WHITNEY EQUIPMENT CO INC 73451 WWTP - MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES WWTP - MAINTENANCE SUPPLIEc 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 8,172.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 776.34 Total: 8,948.34 110 Vouchers for bank code : usbank Bank total : 448,428.83 110 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 448,428.83 Page: 33 Packet Page 60 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201828 5/2/2013 066054 ADIX'S BED & BATH FOR DOGS AND MAY 2013 ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 5/13 - EDh ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 5/2013 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 2,097.71 Total: 2,097.71 201829 5/2/2013 071177 ADVANTAGE BUILDING SERVICES 13-0212 WWTP - MONTHLY JANITORIAL SEI WWTP - MONTHLY JANITORIAL SEI 423.000.76.535.80.41.23 334.00 Total: 334.00 201830 5/2/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6773420 UNIFORM RENTAL SERVICE UNIFORM RENTAL SERVICE 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 28.77 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 2.73 Total: 31.50 201831 5/2/2013 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0424477-IN WWTP - DIESEL FUEL WWTP - DIESEL FUEL 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 3,108.50 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 295.32 Total: 3,403.82 201832 5/2/2013 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC 80188 AWARDS SPRING SOFTBALL AWARDS SPRING SOFTBALL 001.000.64.575.52.31.00 245.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.575.52.31.00 23.28 80263 MEDALS FOR CONQUER THE HILL MEDALS FOR CONQUER THE HILL 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 450.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 42.75 Page: 1 Packet Page 61 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201832 5/2/2013 001835 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC (Continued) Total: 761.03 201833 5/2/2013 073146 BEACON ATHLETICS O425483-IN BASEBALL BASES BASEBALLBASES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 236.00 Freight 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 51.36 Total : 287.36 201834 5/2/2013 071603 BELZONA WASHINGTON INC 8805 WWTP - REPAIR AND REPLACE, MI WWTP - REPAIR AND REPLACE, MI 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 1,120.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 100.80 Total : 1,220.80 201835 5/2/2013 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 4987 E2GA.SERVICES THRU 3/22/13 E2GA.Services thru 3/22/13 423.000.75.594.35.41.30 12,367.09 E2GA.Services thru 3/22/13 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 15,115.34 Total : 27,482.43 201836 5/2/2013 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 984134 INV#984134 - EDMONDS PD - MACH 2ND CHANCE BALLISTIC VEST 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 725.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 68.88 Total : 793.88 201837 5/2/2013 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING & 056180 Storm - Concrete Recycle Storm - Concrete Recycle 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 630.00 Total : 630.00 201838 5/2/2013 069295 BROWN, CANDY BROWN APRIL 2013 BIRD NATURALIST CLASSROOM VI BIRD NATURALIST CLASSROOM VI Page: 2 Packet Page 62 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201838 5/2/2013 069295 BROWN, CANDY (Continued) 001.000.64.574.35.41.00 92.40 Total: 92.40 201839 5/2/2013 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12686856 Lease Ping Div copier/printer Lease Ping Div copier/printer 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 36.16 Total: 36.16 201840 5/2/2013 068484 CEMEX LLC 9425930633 Street - Asphalt Street - Asphalt 111.000.68.542.61.31.00 298.75 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.61.31.00 28.38 Total: 327.13 201841 5/2/2013 003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS 37792666 INV#37792666 ACCT#7898305185 E FUEL FOR NARCS VEHICLE 104.000.41.521.21.32.00 383.35 TAX EXEMPT FILING FEE 104.000.41.521.21.32.00 3.83 Total: 387.18 201842 5/2/2013 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2543192-1 PLY TT JUMBO PLY TT JUMBO 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 60.57 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5.75 Tota I : 66.32 201843 5/2/2013 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2542009-1 Recycle - 3 Boxes of Clear Bags Recycle - 3 Boxes of Clear Bags 421.000.74.537.90.49.00 79.47 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.537.90.49.00 7.55 Tota I : 87.02 Page: 3 Packet Page 63 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201844 5/2/2013 073667 COBURN, LI COBURN 04/25/2013 VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT 001.000.64.575.52.41.00 140.00 Total: 140.00 201845 5/2/2013 074382 CONTECH ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS IN00021491 Storm - Repair Bands Storm - Repair Bands 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 30.50 8.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 2.62 Total: 33.12 201846 5/2/2013 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS April 2013 DRS APRIL 2013 DRS April 2013 DRS 811.000.231.540 155,468.24 Total: 155,468.24 201847 5/2/2013 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 13-3358 MINUTE TAKING 4/23 Council Minutes 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 369.00 Total: 369.00 201848 5/2/2013 071890 ECO3 ASSOCIATES LLC 2116 Storm - Erosion & Sediment Control L Storm - Erosion & Sediment Control L 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 300.00 Total: 300.00 201849 5/2/2013 071255 ECOLIGHTS NORTHWEST LLC 112090 Fac Maint - Fluorescent Light Recyclii Fac Maint - Fluorescent Light Recyclii 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 255.44 Total: 255.44 201850 5/2/2013 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 21387 PARTS PARTS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 46.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.41 Page: 4 Packet Page 64 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201850 5/2/2013 007675 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS (Continued) Total: 50.85 201851 5/2/2013 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 21023 Sewer - Cleaner for Trucks Sewer - Cleaner for Trucks 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 4.99 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 0.47 21353 Water - Svc Parts Water - Svc Parts 421.000.74.534.80.98.00 10.48 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.98.00 1.00 Total: 16.94 201852 5/2/2013 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP CATALINE 16858 SUPERSQUAD CHEER SUPERSQUAD CHEER 122.000.64.571.20.49.00 45.00 Total: 45.00 201853 5/2/2013 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 2-25150 9TH & CASPER ST (WEST PLANTEI 9TH & CASPER ST (WEST PLANTEI 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 2-25175 9TH & CASPER ST (EAST PLANTEF 9TH & CASPER ST (EAST PLANTEF 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 2-28275 SPRINKLER SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.79 2-37180 MINI PARK MINI PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 44.48 7-05276 820 15TH ST SW 820 15TH ST SW 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 130.11 Total: 269.96 Page: 5 Packet Page 65 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 6 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201854 5/2/2013 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION Invoice 2-26950 2-29118 2-29119 4-34080 201855 5/2/2013 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 086486 201856 5/2/2013 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 086637 201857 5/2/2013 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 0089091-IN PO # Description/Account Amount LIFT STATION #3 729 NORTHSTRE/ LIFT STATION #3 729 NORTHSTRE/ 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 64.70 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 34.52 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN - LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN - 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 64.70 LIFT STATION #14 7905 1/2 211TH F LIFT STATION #14 7905 1/2 211TH F 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 31.79 Total : 195.71 WWTP - COPY MACHINE MONTHLN WWTP - COPY MACHINE MONTHLN 423.000.76.535.80.45.41 101.91 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.45.41 9.68 Total: 111.59 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT 001.000.23.523.30.48.00 4.93 Total : 4.93 INV#0089091-IN ACCT#0011847 - E[ FLAT BADGE - RETIRED SGT 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 81.00 FLAT BADGE - RETIRED OFFICER 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 81.00 BADGE CASES FOR RETIRED BAD 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 54.00 PACKAGE INSURANCE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 3.00 MATERIALS FEE - PACKAGING Page: 6 Packet Page 66 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 7 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201857 5/2/2013 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO (Continued) 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 4.50 Freight 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 9.00 0089127-IN INV#0089127-IN ACCT#0011847 - El OFFICER OF THE YEAR BADGE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 76.00 EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR BADGE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 76.00 TIE TACKS, GOLD, CLUTCH ATTMEI 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 336.00 PACKAGE INSURANCE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 6.00 MATERIALS FEE - PACKAGING 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 4.50 Freight 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 9.00 Total : 740.00 201858 5/2/2013 009895 FELDMAN, JAMES A 43013 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 7,170.00 Total : 7,170.00 201859 5/2/2013 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0372968 Meter Inventory - #2024 Meter Inventory - #2024 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 3,144.00 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 298.68 0375136 Water Inventory -#0498 W-VALVCI-OE Water Inventory -#0498 W-VALVCI-OE 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 1,550.02 7.7% sales tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 119.35 Total: 5,112.05 Page: 7 Packet Page 67 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 8 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201860 5/2/2013 072932 FRIEDRICH, KODY FRIEDRICH 16537 IRISH DANCE 16537 IRISH DANCE 16537 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 80.00 IRISH DANCE 16534 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 23.00 Total: 103.00 201861 5/2/2013 011900 FRONTIER 425-712-0647 IRRIGATION SYSTEM IRRIGATION SYSTEM 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 41.39 Total: 41.39 201862 5/2/2013 011900 FRONTIER 253-007-4989 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETRl SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 29.02 253-012-9166 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 151.72 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 281.76 253-014-8062 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 18.53 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 34.42 253-017-4360 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 43.86 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 81.46 425-712-8347 CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 55.02 425-771-0158 FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FA} FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FA} 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 165.07 Page: 8 Packet Page 68 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 9 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201862 5/2/2013 011900 FRONTIER (Continued) 425-776-3896 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER ALA FRANCESANDERSON CENTER FIF 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 110.92 425-776-6829 CITY HALL ALARM LINES 121 5TH P CITY HALL FIRE AND INTRUSION AI 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 110.71 425-778-3297 UTILITY LOCATE DESIGNATED LINI UTILITY LOCATE DESIGNATED LINI 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 19.05 UTILITY LOCATE DESIGNATED LINI 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 35.39 Total: 1,136.93 201863 5/2/2013 073922 GAVIOLA, NIKKA GAVIOLA 16469 TAEKWON-DO 16469 TAEKWON-DO 16469 001.000.64.575.54.41.00 290.50 Total: 290.50 201864 5/2/2013 012199 GRAINGER 9120642898 Water/Sewer /Storm - Small Equip - Water/Sewer /Storm - Small Equip - 421.000.74.534.80.35.00 150.02 Water/Sewer /Storm - Small Equip - 423.000.75.535.80.35.00 150.02 Water/Sewer /Storm - Small Equip - 422.000.72.531.40.35.00 150.02 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.35.00 14.25 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.35.00 14.25 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.40.35.00 14.25 Tota I : 492.81 201865 5/2/2013 012560 HACH COMPANY 8259417 Water Quality - Portable Fluoride Water Quality - Portable Fluoride Page: 9 Packet Page 69 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 10 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201865 5/2/2013 012560 HACH COMPANY (Continued) 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 427.00 Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 27.95 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 43.23 Total: 498.18 201866 5/2/2013 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC 13308933 Water Inventory #0429 w-setter-0.75 Water Inventory #0429 w-setter-0.75 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 850.72 #0065 w-clmpci-08-010 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 278.92 #0570 w-mtrliddi-02-030 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 247.61 Water Supplies Concrete Boxes, PVC 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 335.60 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 130.85 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 31.88 13323078 Water Inventory #432 w-setterbyp-02 Water Inventory #432 w-setterbyp-02 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 2,595.60 #429 w-setter-0.75-012 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 212.68 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 266.79 Total: 4,950.65 201867 5/2/2013 013140 HENDERSON, BRIAN 43 LEOFF Reimbursement LEOFF Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 32.00 LEOFF Reimbursement dental 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 67.00 LEOFF Reimbursement deductibles Page: 10 Packet Page 70 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 11 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201867 5/2/2013 013140 HENDERSON, BRIAN (Continued) 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 84.83 LEOFF Reimbursement co-insurance 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 18.73 Tota I : 202.56 201868 5/2/2013 069164 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 52687293 8300 ELITE COMPUTERS FOR WW 8300EeU/i5347OS/320hq/2V/27k Proi 423.000.76.535.80.31.42 1,334.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.42 126.73 52695261 8300 ELITE COMPUTERS 8300EeU/i5347OS/320hq/2V/27k Proi 001.000.31.518.88.35.00 13,340.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.88.35.00 1,267.30 Total: 16,068.03 201869 5/2/2013 013338 HICKOK, ROBIN 42 LEOFF Reimbursement eye glasses LEOFF Reimbursement deductibles 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 162.32 LEOFF Reimbursement eye glasses 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 146.00 Total: 308.32 201870 5/2/2013 062899 HUFF, ARIELE HUFF 16341 WRITE ABOUT LIFE 16341 WRITE ABOUT LIFE 16341 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 112.20 Total: 112.20 201871 5/2/2013 072041 IBS INCORPORATED 533920-1 Shop Supplies Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 51.66 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 8.78 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 11 Packet Page 71 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 12 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201871 5/2/2013 072041 IBS INCORPORATED (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 5.74 Total: 66.18 201872 5/2/2013 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2265849 WWTP - OFFICE SUPPLIES 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 3.42 WWTP - OFFICE SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 36.00 2266108 WWTP - OFFICE SUPPLIES WWTP - OFFICE SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 92.99 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 8.83 Total: 141.24 201873 5/2/2013 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2269280 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.523.30.31.00 24.28 Total: 24.28 201874 5/2/2013 064934 JOHN BARKER LANDSCAPE 13-3-2 SCHEMATIC DESIGN AND SKETCH SCHEMATIC DESIGN AND SKETCH 125.000.64.576.80.41.00 3,955.00 Total: 3,955.00 201875 5/2/2013 074367 JURASSIC PARLIAMENT 3805 Council Training - Robert's Rules of Council Training - Robert's Rules of 001.000.11.511.60.49.00 450.00 Total: 450.00 201876 5/2/2013 073924 KEARNS, JESSIKA CHRISTINE KEARNS 16477 TAEKWON-DO 16477 TAEKWON-DO 16477 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 247.50 TAEKWON DO 16473 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 52.00 Page: 12 Packet Page 72 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 13 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201876 5/2/2013 073924 073924 KEARNS, JESSIKA CHRISTINE (Continued) Total: 299.50 201877 5/2/2013 074340 KEYS ORGAN IZATIONALCONSULTING COE 0413 WWTP - MANAGEMENT COACHINC WWTP - MANAGEMENT COACHING 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 800.00 Total: 800.00 201878 5/2/2013 074330 KING, BEN 4/16/13 - 4/30/13 GEOSPATIAL DATA COLLECTION & Geospatial Data Collection Mapping 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 272.75 Total: 272.75 201879 5/2/2013 073579 KINGS HEATING INC Bld 2013.0402 Refund of Bldg Permit Fee - duplicate Refund of Bldg Permit Fee - duplicate 001.000.257.620 75.00 Total: 75.00 201880 5/2/2013 074240 KNIGHT, KAREN KNIGHT 16669 FUN FACTORY 16669 FUN FACTORY 16669 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 471.71 Total: 471.71 201881 5/2/2013 074135 LAFAVE, CAROLYN LAFAVE SUPPLIES FOR DELEGATION DEBF SUPPLIES FOR DELEGATION DEBF 138.200.21.557.21.49.00 69.60 9.5% Sales Tax 138.200.21.557.21.49.00 1.46 Total: 71.06 201882 5/2/2013 070478 LANE COMMUNICATIONS INC 2249 R STEVES TWO HOME EXTENSION Rick Steves two home exension fiber 001.000.31.518.87.41.00 16,930.59 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.87.41.00 1,608.41 2251 R STEVES TROUBLESHOOT FIBER Rick Steves Troubleshoot Fiber issue 001.000.31.518.87.41.00 437.50 Page: 13 Packet Page 73 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 14 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201882 5/2/2013 070478 LANE COMMUNICATIONS INC (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.87.41.00 41.56 Total: 19,018.06 201883 5/2/2013 068711 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLY 4013-347 Water - Mower Repair Parts Water - Mower Repair Parts 421.000.74.534.80.98.00 33.16 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.98.00 3.15 Total: 36.31 201884 5/2/2013 074388 LONE MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS 12478 INV#12478 EDMONDS PD REPAIR/PART FOR MTS2000 RADIC 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 365.00 Total: 365.00 201885 5/2/2013 074388 LONE MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS 12465 Unit 203 - Radio Repairs Unit 203 - Radio Repairs 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 279.25 Total: 279.25 201886 5/2/2013 074325 LOPEZ, YUREMI LOPEZ 04/30/2013 17.5 HOURS AS VOLLEYBALL GYM 17.5 HOURS AS VOLLEYBALL GYM 001.000.64.575.52.41.00 175.00 Total: 175.00 201887 5/2/2013 074181 MADSEN, DAWN MADSEN 16445 IRISH DANCE 16445 IRISH DANCE 16445 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 56.00 IRISH DANCE 16559 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 30.00 Total: 86.00 201888 5/2/2013 072136 MANAGERPLUS SOLUTIONS LLC 425771-622013 Fleet - ManagerPlus Software Fleet - ManagerPlus Software 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 449.00 Page: 14 Packet Page 74 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 15 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201888 5/2/2013 072136 072136 MANAGERPLUS SOLUTIONS LLC (Continued) Total: 449.00 201889 5/2/2013 019582 MANOR HARDWARE 466340-00 BIG TOP.PILE COVERS Big Top.Pile Covers 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 266.40 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 25.31 467693-00 BIG TOP.PILE COVERS HARDWARI Big Tob.Pile Covers Hardware 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 24.36 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 2.31 467974-00 BIG TOP -PILE COVERS HARDWARI Big Top -Pile Covers Hardware 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 150.72 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 14.32 Total: 483.42 201890 5/2/2013 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 1222 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 88.32 Total: 88.32 201891 5/2/2013 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN 41 LEOFF Reimbursement deductibles LEOFF Reimbursement deductibles 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 97.49 LEOFF Reimbursement co-insurance 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 275.41 Total: 372.90 201892 5/2/2013 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 49976467 WWTP - MECHANICAL SUPPLIES WWTP - MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 122.79 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 16.48 Page: 15 Packet Page 75 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 16 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201892 5/2/2013 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO (Continued) 50249294 WWTP - MECHANICAL SUPPLIES WWTP - MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 283.22 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 29.53 Total: 452.02 201893 5/2/2013 071011 MIDCO-WEST INC 440008519 WWTP - REPAIR ON STARTER, ME( WWTP - REPAIR ON STARTER, ME( 423.000.76.535.80.41.21 565.77 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.21 53.75 Total: 619.52 201894 5/2/2013 072223 MILLER, DOUG MILLER 04/24/2013 GYM MONITOR GYM MONITOR 001.000.64.575.52.41.00 100.00 Total: 100.00 201895 5/2/2013 069923 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC WA23-250135 WWTP - REPAIR & REPLACE, MECI WWTP - REPAIR & REPLACE, MECI 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 857.12 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 46.35 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 85.82 Total: 989.29 201896 5/2/2013 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0343391-IN Sewer - Crew Sweatshirt Sewer - Crew Sweatshirt 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 28.40 Freight 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 11.80 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 3.82 Page: 16 Packet Page 76 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 17 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201896 5/2/2013 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC (Continued) 0343474-IN Sewer - Blue towels Sewer - Blue towels 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 159.95 Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 26.65 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 17.73 0343841-IN Sewer- HVY DTY NTRLE Sewer- HVY DTY NTRLE 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 256.00 Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 49.72 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 29.04 Tota I : 583.11 201897 5/2/2013 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-645301 RENTALS HAINES WHARF PARK RENTALS HAINES WHARF PARK 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 220.77 Total: 220.77 201898 5/2/2013 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 373 Hist. Presv. Minutetaker 4/11/13 Hist. Presv. Minutetaker 4/11/13 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 160.00 Total: 160.00 201899 5/2/2013 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 511454 CARD STOCK CARD STOCK 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 10.48 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 0.99 Total: 11.47 201900 5/2/2013 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 397424 PW Admin Office Supplies - Pens PW Admin Office Supplies - Pens Page: 17 Packet Page 77 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 18 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201900 5/2/2013 063511 OFFICE MAX INC (Continued) 001.000.65.519.91.31.00 54.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.519.91.31.00 5.19 Tota I : 59.79 201901 5/2/2013 073987 OSMONSON, SHANNON OSMONSON 16431 LITTLE FISHES PRESCHOOL LITTLE FISHES PRESCHOOL 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 574.65 Total: 574.65 201902 5/2/2013 072539 OTAK INC-WASHINGTON 41300161 E2CC.SERVICES THRU 4/5/13 E2CC.Services thru 4/5/13 112.200.68.595.33.41.00 11,594.52 Total: 11, 594.52 201903 5/2/2013 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 47445 PARKS TOPSOIL PARKS TOPSOIL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 390.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 37.05 48008 PARKS TOPSOIL PARKS TOPSOIL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 325.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 30.88 Total: 782.93 201904 5/2/2013 073489 PAYTON, JOHN SCOTT PAYTON 16562 FISHING IN WASHINGTON 16562 FISHING IN WASHINGTON 16562 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 347.60 Total: 347.60 201905 5/2/2013 008400 PETTY CASH ADMN PETTY CASH 4-13 POLICE ADMIN PETTY CASH 4/30/1 DUPLICATE LOCKER KEY 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 1.96 Page: 18 Packet Page 78 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 19 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201905 5/2/2013 008400 PETTY CASH (Continued) ZIPLOC BAGS - PARKING CITATION 001.000.41.521.70.31.00 8.09 SHADOW BOX - CHIEF FOSTER MI 001.000.41.521.70.31.00 14.87 REFRESHMENTS - 2/26 POLICE FO 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 8.00 REFRESHMENTS S&W ARMORER 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 25.99 LAWLESS BREAKFAST - 3/28 SCSP 001.000.41.521.10.43.00 12.00 GREENMUN - FUEL - SPOKANE TR, 001.000.41.521.40.43.00 32.33 GREENMUN - 4/7 DINNER - SPOKA 001.000.41.521.40.43.00 11.73 GREENMUN - 4/8 BREAKFAST - SPi 001.000.41.521.40.43.00 17.66 GREENMUN - 4/8 LUNCH - SPOKAN 001.000.41.521.40.43.00 11.85 GREENMUN - FUEL - SPOKANE TR, 001.000.41.521.40.43.00 39.11 PARKING @ SNO COUNTY - WP11-1 001.000.41.521.21.43.00 6.00 SCRUB PADS FOR ARMORY 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 2.18 Total: 191.77 201906 5/2/2013 067159 PIERCE COUNTY BUDGET & AR146514 CAR WASH COUPONS - PUBLIC EE Car Wash Coupons - Public Educatio 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 100.00 Total: 100.00 201907 5/2/2013 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC 3713466 WWTP - REPLACE INHIBITORS, PL WWTP - REPLACE INHIBITORS, PL 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 178.86 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 19 Packet Page 79 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 20 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201907 5/2/2013 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 16.99 3719134 WWTP - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES WWTP - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 453.63 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 43.09 3737828 WWTP - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES WWTP - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 21.65 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 2.06 Total: 716.28 201908 5/2/2013 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 206891 WATER SEWER STREET STORM-L� Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 2.89 207019 WATER SEWER STREET STORM-L� Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 2.89 207162 WATER SEWER STREET STORM-L� Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei Page: 20 Packet Page 80 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 21 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201908 5/2/2013 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR (Continued) 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 2.89 207257 WATER SEWER STREET STORM-L� Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 2.90 Water Sewer Street Storm - L&I Safei 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 2.89 Total: 46.36 201909 5/2/2013 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 03870 CITY STORMWATER RENT TO POR CITY STORMWATER RENT TO POR 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 2,513.24 Total: 2,513.24 201910 5/2/2013 064088 PROTECTION ONE 291104 ALARM MONITORING - PARKS MAI1 ALARM MONITORING FOR PARKS 1 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 53.65 ALARM MONITORING FOR PARKS 1 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 53.65 ALARM MONITORING FOR FIRE ST, 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 107.52 Total: 214.82 201911 5/2/2013 071911 PROTZ, MARGARET PROTZ 16426 FELDENKRAIS FELDENKRAIS 001.000.64.575.54.41.00 151.00 Total: 151.00 Page: 21 Packet Page 81 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 22 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201912 5/2/2013 068697 PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING INC Invoice 2013-4996 201913 5/2/2013 067263 PUGET SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY 0012202-IN 201914 5/2/2013 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 201915 5/2/2013 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 200002411383 200000704821 200007876143 200009595790 200011439656 200016558856 200016815843 PO # Description/Account Amount public safety testing services public safety testing services 001.000.22.521.10.41.00 700.00 Total : 700.00 WWTP - SAFETY EQUIPMENT WWTP - SAFETY EQUIPMENT 423.000.76.535.80.31.12 67.95 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.12 8.56 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.12 7.28 Total : 83.79 POOL GAS SERVICE POOL GAS SERVICE 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 173.51 Total : 173.51 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,963.09 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 318.93 FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 652.68 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 213.36 CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N / ME CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N / ME 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 459.29 FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / Page: 22 Packet Page 82 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 23 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201915 5/2/2013 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 711.72 200017676343 FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY 21105 7 FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY 21105 7 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 327.09 200019375639 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 1 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 1 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 286.77 200019895354 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 273.57 200020415911 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 001.000.65.519.91.47.00 31.49 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 119.67 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 119.67 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 119.67 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 119.67 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 119.68 200021829581 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 00( WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 00( 423.000.76.535.80.47.63 46.08 200024711901 CITY PARK BUILDING 600 3RD AVE CITY PARK BUILDING 600 3RD AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 250.89 Total: 6,133.32 201916 5/2/2013 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 004243 Storm - Street Sweeping Dump Fees Storm - Street Sweeping Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 351.48 Page: 23 Packet Page 83 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 24 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201916 5/2/2013 062657 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY (Continued) Total: 351.48 201917 5/2/2013 065001 SCHIRMAN, RON 35 LEOFF Reimbursement eye glasses LEOFF Reimbursement eye glasses 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 149.00 LEOFF Reimbursement deductible 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 160.77 Total: 309.77 201918 5/2/2013 070115 SHANNON & WILSON INC 88345 E2FB.SERVICES THRU 4/13/13 E2FB.Services thru 4/13/13 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 1,107.40 88346 E2FB.SERVICES THRU 4/13/13 (PH, E2FB.Services thru 4/13/13 (Phase 2 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 4,560.50 Total: 5,667.90 201919 5/2/2013 071725 SKAGIT GARDENS INC 52203273 FLOWER PROGRAM FLOWER PROGRAM 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 1,551.21 9.5% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 147.36 52203277 IMPATIENS FLOWERS FOR CEMET IMPATIENS FLOWERS FOR CEMET 130.000.64.536.50.31.00 81.41 9.5% Sales Tax 130.000.64.536.50.31.00 7.73 Total: 1,787.71 201920 5/2/2013 036955 SKY NURSERY 90701 FLOWER PROGRAM HANGING BA,< FLOWER PROGRAM HANGING BA: 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 263.84 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 25.06 Total: 288.90 201921 5/2/2013 037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST # 1 2013FD#1 Note 2013 DEBT SERVICE PMT FIRE STP Page: 24 Packet Page 84 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 25 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201921 5/2/2013 037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST # 1 (Continued) 2013 Prin Debt Service Pmt Fire Stati 001.000.39.591.22.75.00 64,013.79 2013 Int Debt Service Pmt Fire Statio 001.000.39.592.22.83.00 1,939.68 Total: 65,953.47 201922 5/2/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2006-6395-3 131 SUNSETAVE 131 SUNSETAVE 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 239.14 2009-4334-8 23202 EDMONDS WAY 23202 EDMONDS WAY 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 147.97 2010-5432-7 50 RAILROAD AVE 50 RAILROAD AVE 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 296.91 2021-3965-5 100 RAILROAD AVE 100 RAILROAD AVE 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 43.11 2026-2041-5 24000 78TH AVE W 24000 78TH AVE W 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 30.33 Total : 757.46 201923 5/2/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2030-9778-7 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 10( WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 10( 423.000.76.535.80.47.61 24,691.54 Total : 24,691.54 201924 5/2/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-0254-7 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95- PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95- 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 31.84 2002-0256-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20829 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 20829 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 30.33 2003-4823-3 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W Page: 25 Packet Page 85 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 26 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201924 5/2/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 72.49 2003-9895-6 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ; FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ; 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,393.55 2006-1131-7 LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE V LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE V 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 271.06 2008-6520-2 LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 182.50 2011-5141-2 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8400 219' PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8400 219- 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 31.84 2011-9222-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 31.76 2015-5174-4 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 2,083.98 2015-8215-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 43.38 2016-1195-1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 42.60 2017-5147-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 102.16 2019-0786-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 39.98 2019-4248-9 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 001.000.65.519.91.47.00 80.35 Page: 26 Packet Page 86 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 27 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201924 5/2/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 305.31 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 305.31 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 305.31 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 305.31 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 305.32 2020-7719-4 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,007.90 2020-8787-0 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 287.50 2022-8912-0 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99 / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 106.14 2022-9166-2 CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION 17 CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION 17 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 4,435.15 2024-2780-3 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8602 188' PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8602 188' 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 30.77 2024-3924-6 CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 2,506.08 2025-1986-4 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 1400 OLY PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 1400 OL 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 31.79 2028-0763-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 33.18 2036-5215-1 5-CORNERS RESERVOIR 8519 BOA Page: 27 Packet Page 87 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 28 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201924 5/2/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 5-CORNERS RESERVOIR 8519 BOA 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 553.11 Total: 14,956.00 201925 5/2/2013 037800 SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT PS O456/0457 PERMIT RENEWAL FOR POOL, PEF PERMIT RENEWAL FOR POOL, PEF 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 683.00 Total: 683.00 201926 5/2/2013 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 4216292-0001-04 KEITH RANKIN BOOTS KEITH RANKIN BOOTS 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 149.99 SUPPLIES PARKS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 369.72 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 14.25 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 35.12 Total: 569.08 201927 5/2/2013 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 2004656-01 Sewer - 5 Work Jeans - B Nilson Sewer - 5 Work Jeans - B Nilson 423.000.75.535.20.24.00 199.95 9.2% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.20.24.00 18.40 Total: 218.35 201928 5/2/2013 009400 STELLAR INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 3236681 Sewer - Marking Paints, Bandaids Sewer - Marking Paints, Bandaids 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 311.56 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 29.61 Total: 341.17 201929 5/2/2013 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S100501228.01 WWTP - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES Page: 28 Packet Page 88 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 29 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201929 5/2/2013 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY (Continued) WWTP - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 237.42 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 22.56 Total: 259.98 201930 5/2/2013 072562 STUD1O3MUSIC LLC STUD1O3MUSIC 16654 KINDERMUSIK WINTER 16654 KINDERMUSIK WINTER 16654 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 782.69 KINDERMUSIK WINTER 16656 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 571.36 KINDERMUSIK WINTER 16652 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 1,084.90 Total: 2,438.95 201931 5/2/2013 073970 TALLMAN, TYLER TALLMAN 04/30/2013 55 HOURS AS SOFTBALL FIELD AT' 55 HOURS AS SOFTBALL FIELD AT- 001.000.64.575.52.41.00 550.00 Total: 550.00 201932 5/2/2013 040916 TC SPAN AMERICA 63277 Fleet - Work TShirts Fleet - Work TShirts 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 247.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 23.47 Total: 270.47 201933 5/2/2013 073544 TEKTRONIX INC USG785879 WWTP - CALIBRATION FOR PRESS WWTP - CALIBRATION FOR PRESS 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 373.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 35.44 Total: 408.44 201934 5/2/2013 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1817877 NEWSPAPER AD Page: 29 Packet Page 89 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 30 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201934 5/2/2013 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY (Continued) Closed Recrd.Rev. Rezone 001.000.25.514.30.44.00 53.32 1817883 NEWSPAPER AD Public Hrg. Code Amendment 001.000.25.514.30.44.00 39.56 Total: 92.88 201935 5/2/2013 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1816783 Legal notice: PLN 2013.0002 -McDoi Legal notice: PLN 2013.0002 -McDoi 001.000.62.558.60.44.00 84.28 1816815 Legal notice PLN 2013.0011(CHC) Legal notice PLN 2013.0011(CHC) 001.000.62.558.60.44.00 142.80 1817170 Legal Notice: PLN2013.0022-Pine Si Legal Notice: PLN2013.0022-Pine S1 001.000.62.558.60.44.00 92.88 1817269 Legal notice: PLN2013.0014 (Thues( Legal notice: PLN2013.0014 (Thues( 001.000.62.558.60.44.00 68.80 1817947 Legal notice: PLN20130016 -Saffold; Legal notice: PLN20130016 -Saffold; 001.000.62.558.60.44.00 60.20 Total: 448.96 201936 5/2/2013 068249 TRAUTMANN MAHER & ASSOCIATES 11-19-12 LEOFF Fire review of benefits LEOFF Fire review of benefits 617.000.51.522.20.23.00 1,232.50 Total: 1,232.50 201937 5/2/2013 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 19766 Stormwater Tech - Desk Lock Supplie Stormwater Tech - Desk Lock Supplie 422.000.72.531.90.51.00 74.00 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.51.00 7.03 19777 Unit 2 - Keys and Tags Page: 30 Packet Page 90 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 31 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201937 5/2/2013 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY (Continued) Unit 2 - Keys and Tags 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 33.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3.14 Total: 117.17 201938 5/2/2013 063939 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-80339 2013 EDEN SUPPORT MAINTENAN, 2013 EDEN Support Maintenance 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 4,793.89 2013 EDEN Support Maintenance 423.000.75.535.80.48.00 4,793.89 2013 EDEN Support Maintenance 422.000.72.531.90.48.00 4,793.89 2013 EDEN Support Maintenance 001.000.25.514.30.48.00 4,059.79 2013 EDEN Support Maintenance 001.000.31.514.23.48.00 30,772.92 2013 EDEN Support Maintenance 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 5,012.67 2013 EDEN Support Maintenance 001.000.22.518.10.48.00 4,884.57 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 455.42 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.48.00 455.42 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.48.00 455.42 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.48.00 385.68 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.48.00 2,923.43 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 476.20 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 31 Packet Page 91 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 32 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201938 5/2/2013 063939 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC (Continued) 001.000.22.518.10.48.00 464.03 045-82789 2013 EDEN DASHBOARD SUPPOR- 2013 EDEN Dashboard Support Main 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 1,260.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 119.70 045-84781 2013 EDEN UTILITY BILLING WEB 2013 EDEN Utility Billing Web Suppo 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 499.95 2013 EDEN Utility Billing Web Suppo 423.000.75.535.80.48.00 499.95 2013 EDEN Utility Billing Web Suppo 422.000.72.531.90.48.00 500.10 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 47.50 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.48.00 47.50 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.48.00 47.50 Total: 67,749.42 201939 5/2/2013 043935 UPS 2T4T13163 SHIPPER NUMBER 2T4T13 UPS ground shipping service for GIS 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 7.06 Total: 7.06 201940 5/2/2013 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WF 0472901-WA-B Fleet - DOT Fleet - DOT 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 65.00 Total: 65.00 201941 5/2/2013 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA 0472901-wa 0472901-WA EDMONDS PD MCINTI RESPIRATORY QUEST. REVIEW - N 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 32.00 Page: 32 Packet Page 92 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 33 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201941 5/2/2013 068724 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OI (Continued) Total: 32.00 201942 5/2/2013 069836 VOLT SERVICE GROUP 29115078 WWTP - ADMIN ASSISTANT PROFE WWTP - ADMIN ASSISTANT PROFE 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 488.80 Total: 488.80 201943 5/2/2013 067917 WALLY'S TOWING INC 48990 INV#48990 - EDMONDS PD TOW 97 HARLEY DAVIDSON #71387 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 158.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.01 Total: 173.01 201944 5/2/2013 074416 WEEDMAN, TAMMY 40513 TRAVEL REFUND FOR TRAINING TRAVEL REFUND FOR TRAINING 001.000.23.512.50.43.00 85.32 Tota I : 85.32 201945 5/2/2013 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5893 BUSINESS CARDS -RICH LINDSAY 250-00300 Business Cards -Rich Lindsay 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 14.00 250-00300 Renee Mcrae 001.000.64.571.21.49.00 14.00 250-00300 Brian R. Tuley 001.000.31.518.88.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Leif Bjorback 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Mike Delilla 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Rob English 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Bertrand Hauss 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Jaime Hawkins 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 Page: 33 Packet Page 93 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 34 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201945 5/2/2013 073552 WELCO SALES LLC Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) 250-00300 Pamela Lemcke 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Jeanie McConnell 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Jerry Shuster 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Edward Sibrel 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 JoAnne Zulauf 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Diane Cunningham 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Robert Chave 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Linda Thornquist 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Mike Thies 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Chuck Miller 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Patrick Lawler 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 250-00300 Marie Harrison 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 1.33 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.49.00 1.33 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.88.31.00 1.33 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 22.61 Total: 306.60 Page: 34 Packet Page 94 of 266 vchlist Voucher List Page: 35 05/02/2013 7:59:41AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201946 5/2/2013 073018 WILCO-WINFIELD 201947 5/2/2013 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 120 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 120 Vouchers in this report Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 122761 DYNAMARK BLUE GAL DYNAMARK BLUE GAL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 112.52 Freight 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 20.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 12.59 Total : 145.11 1016 APR-13 RETAINER Monthly Retainer - April 2013 001.000.36.515.33.41.00 13,390.00 Total : 13,390.00 Bank total : 492,863.38 Total vouchers : 492,863.38 Page: 35 Packet Page 95 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Proiect Title Number Number FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 EOLA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 EOLB General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 ElEA PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 EBMB PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM NPDES m013 E7FG STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1 FD STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1 FF STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) c349 E1 FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 EOFC STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1 FA STM Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements c307 E9FB STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 EOAA STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 96 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Proiect Title Number Number STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA SWR Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 EBGC SWR City -Wide Sewer Improvements c301 EBGD SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) c298 EBGA SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA WTR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 EOJA WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA WTR 5th Avenue Overlay Project c399 E2CC WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 EOIA WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 97 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title WWTP N/A c385 WWTP Switchgear Upgrade EOAA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade STM EOFC c326 Stormwater GIS Support KWTR EOIA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements WTR EOJA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program OLAr c32 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project FAC EOLB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs S ers Roundabout (212th Street Sa@ 84th Avenue W) STIR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neiahborhood Traffic Calmina 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STIR E1DA c354 Sunset Wal SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM E1 FA c336 SW Edmonds-1 05th/1 06th Ave W Storm Improvements Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades STM E1 FF c341 Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects tormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) STM E1 FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives E1 FN rrinville Creek Culvert Replacement SWR E1GA c347 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Upda nowSewer, WTR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with nwood WTR E1JC c345 Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study 1111�PRV Station 11 a Bandon WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program E1JK In Street Watermain STIR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update 9th Avenue Improvement Project STIR E2AC c404 Citywide Safety Improvements E2AD Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) WTR E2CA c388 2012 Waterline Overlay Program Pioneer Way Road Repa STIR E2CC c399 5th Ave Overlav Proiect STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Draina SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 98 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Funding Number STM E2FE SWR E2GB EYA STM E3FB Project Accounting Number Project Title c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c369J&12 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update Am c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c406 1%013 Citywide Drainage Replacement c407 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects AW E3FC c408 ��reek Stor�v Reductrofit Sfudy STM EYD c409 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) orthstream Pipe Abandonement on Puget Drive SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements * _ WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program OVD Watermain Improvements STIR E61DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Program E7AA Main Street LightipjLand_§ygwalk Enhancements STIR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements _ E7CB hell Valley Emergency ccess Road STM E7FG m013 NPDES E7MA ayton Street Plaza SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from Us 13 - 09/01/08) E8GC NSF Double Track Project SWR E8GD c301 City -Wide Sewer Improvements PM E8MA ourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking 2009 Street Overlay Program STIR E91DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project c307 Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 99 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Number Number Project Title WTR c141 E3JB OVD Watermain Improvements SWR c142 E3GB OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements PM c146 E2DB Interurban Trail General c238 E6MA SR99 Enhancement Program STIR c245 E6DA 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project STIR c256 E6DB Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project STIR c265 E7AA Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements STIR c268 E7CB Shell Valley Emergency Access Road PM c276 E7MA Dayton Street Plaza PM c282 EBMA Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM c290 EBMB Marina Beach Additional Parking STIR c294 E9CA 2009 Street Overlay Program SWR c298 EBGA Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) SWR c300 EBGC BNSF Double Track Project SWR c301 EBGD City -Wide Sewer Improvements SWR c304 E9GA Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design STM c307 E9FB Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation STIR c312 E9DA 226th Street Walkway Project PM c321 E9MA Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements WTR c324 EOIA AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements STM c326 EOFC Stormwater GIS Support FAC c327 EOLA Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project STIR c329 EOAA 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade FAC c332 EOLB Senior Center Roof Repairs WTR c333 E1JA 2011 Waterline Replacement Program STM c336 E1 FA SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements STM c339 E1 FD Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades WTR c340 E1JE 2012 Waterline Replacement Program STM c341 E1 FF Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects STR c342 E1AA Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STIR c343 E1AB 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming WTR c344 E1JB 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood WTR c345 E1JC Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 100 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Number Number Project Title WTR c346 E1JD PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment SWR c347 E1GA 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement STM c349 E1 FH Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) STIR c354 E1 DA Sunset Walkway Improvements WTR c363 EOJA 2010 Waterline Replacement Program STIR c368 E1CA 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements SWR c369 E2GA 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update WTR c370 E1GB Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update General c372 ElEA SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM c374 E1 FM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives WTR c375 E1JK Main Street Watermain STM c376 E1 FN Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement STM c378 E21FA North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements STM c379 E2FB SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM c380 E2FC Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STM c381 E2FD Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 STM c382 E21FE 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements WWTP c385 N/A WWTP Switchgear Upgrade WTR c388 E2CA 2012 Waterline Overlay Program WTR c389 E2CB Pioneer Way Road Repair SWR c390 E2GB Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation STIR c391 E2AA Transportation Plan Update STIR c392 E2AB 9th Avenue Improvement Project WTR c397 E3JA 2013 Waterline Replacement Program SWR c398 E3GA 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project STIR c399 E2CC 5th Ave Overlay Project STIR c404 E2AC Citywide Safety Improvements STIR c405 E2AD Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) STM c406 EYA 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement STM c407 E3FB 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects STM c408 E3FC Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study STM c409 E3FD Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) STM c410 E31FE Northstream Pipe Abandonement on Puget Drive STIR i005 E7AC 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 101 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Number Number Project Title STM m013 E7FG NPDES Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 102 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Proiect Title Number Number STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 EOAA STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 EOJA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE STM 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement c406 E3FA STM 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects c407 E3FB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 5th Ave Overlay Project c399 E2CC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1 CA WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 EOIA SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 EBGC STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB STR Citywide Safety Improvements c404 E2AC SWR City -Wide Sewer Improvements c301 EBGD STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) c409 E3FD WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 EOLA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 103 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Proiect Title Number Number PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) c298 EBGA STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 EBMB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonement on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES m013 E7FG SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1 FD PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 EOLB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA WTR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 ElEA General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1 FF STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) c349 E1 FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 EOFC STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1 FA WWTP WWTP Switchgear Upgrade c385 N/A STM Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation c307 E9FB STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA Revised 5/2/2013 Packet Page 104 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (Phase and Task Numbers) Phases and Tasks (Enaineerina Division Phase Title ct Construction ds Design pl Preliminary sa Site Acquisition & Prep st Study ro Right -of -Way Task Title 196 Traffic Engineering & Studies 197 MAIT 198 CTR 199 Engineering Plans & Services 950 Engineering Staff Time 970 Construction Management 981 Contract 990 Miscellaneous 991 Retainage stm Engineering Staff Time -Storm str Engineering Staff Time -Street swr Engineering Staff Time -Sewer wtr Engineering Staff Time -Water prk Engineering Staff Time -Park Packet Page 105 of 266 Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 612 - 04/16/2013 to 04/30/2013 Bank: usbank - US Bank Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 60178 05/03/2013 mebt AST TTEE 76,793.55 0.00 60179 05/03/2013 epoa EPOA-1 POLICE 1,150.00 0.00 60180 05/03/2013 epoa4 EPOA-4 POLICE SUPPORT 117.00 0.00 60181 05/03/2013 flex FLEX -PLAN SERVICES, INC 315.83 0.00 60182 05/03/2013 jhan JOHN HANCOCK 1,495.64 0.00 60183 05/03/2013 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 3,241.05 0.00 60184 05/03/2013 cope SEIU COPE 62.00 0.00 60185 05/03/2013 seiu SEIU LOCAL 925 2,986.12 0.00 60186 05/03/2013 sdu STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 250.00 0.00 60187 05/03/2013 uw UNITED WAY OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY 356.00 0.00 60188 05/03/2013 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 2,215.57 0.00 60189 05/03/2013 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 15,900.50 0.00 104,883.26 0.00 Bank: wire - US BANK Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 2002 05/03/2013 aflac AFLAC 4,571.80 0.00 2005 05/03/2013 front FRONTIER BANK 85,214.11 0.00 2006 05/03/2013 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 208.50 0.00 89,994.41 0.00 Grand Totals: 194,877.67 0.00 5/2/2013 Page 1 of Packet Page 106 of 266 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 612 (04/16/2013 to 04/30/2013) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount 121 SICK SICK LEAVE 553.99 17,343.47 122 VACATION VACATION 1,136.12 39,059.01 123 HOLIDAY HOLIDAY HOURS 90.50 3,038.31 124 HOLIDAY FLOATER HOLIDAY 109.50 3,160.47 125 COMP HOURS COMPENSATORY TIME 210.64 7,248.61 130 COMP HOURS Holidav Compensation Used 7.20 252.22 132 JURY DUTY JURY DUTY 6.00 219.31 150 REGULAR HOURS Kelly Dav Used 216.00 7,638.16 155 COMP HOURS COMPTIME AUTO PAY 86.96 3,677.48 190 REGULAR HOURS REGULAR HOURS 15,407.80 510,329.14 195 REGULAR HOURS ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE 9.00 316.00 196 REGULAR HOURS LIGHT DUTY 124.00 4,699.60 215 OVERTIME HOURS WATER WATCH STANDBY 60.00 2,620.40 216 MISCELLANEOUS STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT 15.00 1,364.74 220 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME 1.5 150.75 8,696.17 225 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -DOUBLE 0.25 14.67 410 MISCELLANEOUS WORKING OUT OF CLASS 0.00 71.04 411 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 0.00 997.65 602 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 34.25 0.00 604 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 150.30 0.00 901 SICK ACCRUED SICK LEAVE 9.11 0.00 acc MISCELLANEOUS ACCREDITATION PAY 0.00 23.56 acs MISCELLANEOUS ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT 0.00 159.69 boc MISCELLANEOUS BOC II Certification 0.00 80.05 cpl MISCELLANEOUS TRAINING CORPORAL 0.00 137.44 crt MISCELLANEOUS CERTIFICATION III PAY 0.00 513.04 det MISCELLANEOUS DETECTIVE PAY 0.00 95.89 det4 MISCELLANEOUS Detective 4% 0.00 795.84 ed1 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 2% 0.00 722.30 ed2 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 4% 0.00 834.14 ed3 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 6% 0.00 4,920.31 fmlc COMP HOURS Family Medical Leave -Comp Use 1.00 42.12 fmis SICK FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK 66.57 2,802.19 05/02/2013 Packet Page 107 of 266 Page 1 of 2 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 612 (04/16/2013 to 04/30/2013) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount fmly VACATION Family Medical Leave Vacation 14.43 607.93 hol HOLIDAY HOLIDAY 3.00 105.09 k9 MISCELLANEOUS K-9 PAY 0.00 211.31 Iq1 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY PAY 2% 0.00 1,928.00 Ici2 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY PAY 4% 0.00 1,518.30 Iq3 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY 6% 0.00 4,669.31 Iq4 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 1 % 0.00 391.98 Iq5 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 3% 0.00 66.98 Iq6 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv .5% 0.00 225.96 Iq7 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 1.5% 0.00 604.09 Iqh LONGEVITY Lonqevitv Hourly 0.00 0.00 mtc MISCELLANEOUS MOTORCYCLE PAY 0.00 191.78 ooc MISCELLANEOUS 5% OUT OF CLASS 0.00 239.28 pds MISCELLANEOUS Public Disclosure Specialist 0.00 44.66 phv MISCELLANEOUS PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY 0.00 1,665.12 prof MISCELLANEOUS PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS ; 0.00 147.00 sdp MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL DUTY PAY 5% 0.00 290.85 sqt MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT 0.00 147.00 traf MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC 0.00 302.03 18,462.37 $635,229.69 Total Net Pay: $436,709.80 05/02/2013 Packet Page 108 of 266 Page 2 of 2 AM-5704 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: Consent Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Review Committee: Type: Action Information Submitted By: Committee Action: 3. C. Carolyn LaFave Subject Title Approval of list of Edmonds' Businesses applying for renewal of their liquor license with the Washington State Liquor Control Board, April 2013. Recommendation Please approve the list of Edmonds' businesses applying for renewal of their WSLCB licenses. Previous Council Action Narrative The City Clerk's Office, the Police Department, and the Mayor's Office have reviewed the attached list and have no concerns with the Washington State Liquor Control Board renewing the liquor licenses of the listed businesses. WSLCB Apr 2013 Inbox Finalize for Agenda Mayor Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 04/29/2013 A t+-mnhmnnte Form Review Reviewed By Date Sandy Chase 04/29/2013 10:51 AM Dave Earling 04/29/2013 01:44 PM Started On: 04/25/2013 09:30 AM Packet Page 109 of 266 N 0 N Washington State Liquor Control Board PO Box 43098, 3000 Pacific Ave. SE; Olympia WA 98504-3098, (360) 664-1600 MAYOR OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 RECEIVED APR 11 2013 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR v C CD -0 03 m Washington State Liquor Control Board PO Box 43098, 3000 Pacific Ave. SE, Olympia WA 98504-3098, (360) 664-1600 p www.liq.wa.gov Fax #: (360) 753-2710 N April 06, 2013 Dear Local Authority: RE: Liquor License Renewal Applications in Your Jurisdiction - Your Objection Opportunity Enclosed please find a list of liquor -licensed premises in your jurisdiction whose liquor licenses will expire in about 90 days. This is your opportunity to object to these license renewal requests as authorized by RCW 66.24.010 (8). 1) Objection to License Renewal To object to a liquor license renewal: fax or mail a letter to the Washington State Liquor Control Board (WSLCB) Licensing Division. This letter must: o Detail the reason(s) for your objection, including a statement of all the facts upon which your objection or objections are based. You may include attachments and supporting documents which contain or confirm the facts upon which your objections are based. o Please note that whether a hearing will be granted or not is within the Board's discretion per RCW 66.24.010 (8)(d). Your letter or fax of objection must be received by the Board's Licensing Division at least 30 days prior to the I.Sc.enae expiration date. If you need additional time you must request that in writing. Please be aware, however, that it is within the Board's discretion to grant or deny any requests for extension of time to submit objections. Your request for extension will be granted or denied in writing. If objections are not timely received, they will not be considered as part of the renewal process. A copy of your objection and any attachments and supporting materials will be made available to the licensee, therefore, it is the Local Authority's responsibility to redact any confidential or non-disclosable information (see RCW 42.56) prior to submission to the WSLCB. 2) Status of License While Objection Pending During the time an objection to a renewal is pending, the permanent liquor license is placed on hold. However, temporary licenses are regularly issued to the licensee until a final decision is made by the Board. 3) Procedure Following Licensing Division Receipt of Objection After we receive your objection, our licensing staff will prepare a report for review by the Licensing Director. The report will include your letter of objection, as well as any attachments and supporting documents you send. The Licensing Director will then decide to renew the liquor license, or to proceed with non -renewal. 4) Procedure if Board Does Not Renew License If the Board decides not to renew a license, we will notify the licensee in writing, stating the reason for this decision. The licensee also has the right to request a hearing to contest non -renewal of their liquor license. RCW 66.24.010 (8)(d). If the licensee makes a timely request for a hearing, we will notify you. The Board's Licensing Division will be required to present evidence at the hearing before an administrative law judge to support the non -renewal recommendation. You may present evidence in support of your objection or objections. The administrative law judge will consider all of the evidence and issue an initial order for the Board's review. The Board members have final authority to renew the liquor license and will enter a final order announcing their decision. N 0 C CD cu 5) Procedure if Board Renews License Over Your Objection IVIf the Board decides to renew the license over your objection, you will be notified in writing. At that time, you may be o given an opportunity to request a hearing. An opportunity for a hearing is offered at the Board's discretion. If a hearing is held, you will be responsible for presenting evidence before an Administrative Law Judge in support of your objection to O)license renewal. The Board's Licensing Division will present evidence in support of license renewal. The Licensee may also participate and present evidence if the licensee desires. The administrative law judge will consider all of the evidence, and issue an initial order for the Board's review. The Board members have final authority to renew the liquor license and will enter a final order announcing their decision. For questions about this process, contact the WSLOB Licensing Division at (360) 664-1600 or email us at wslcb@liq.wa.gov. Sincerely, A?.an E. Rathbun Alan E. Rathbun, Director, Licensing and Regulation Division LIQ 864 07110 C CD C091080-2 WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD DATE: 04/06/2013 m LICENSED ESTABLISHMENTS IN INCORPORATED AREAS CITY OF EDMONDS (BY ZIP CODE) FOR EXPIRATION DATE OF 20130731 o_ LICENSE N rn LICENSEE BUSINESS NAME AND ADDRESS NUMBER PRIVILEGES rn 1. MAD ANTHONY'S INCORPORATED ANTHONY'S HOMEPORT 352129 SPIRITS/BR/WN REST LOUNGE + 456 ADMIRAL WAY EDMONDS WA 98020 0000 OFF -PREMISES SALE WINE 2 . SUNG CORPORATION NORTH CHINA RESTAURANT 369260 SPIRITS/BR/WN REST SERVICE BAR 22814 100TH AVE W EDMONDS WA 98020 0000 3 . PRISHAM ENTERPRISES, INC. 7-ELEVEN STORE 2306-25334E 368588 GROCERY STORE - BEER/WINE 7-ELEVEN,INC. 8101 238TH ST SW EDMONDS WA 98020 0000 4 . DEMETRI'S WOODSTONE TAVERNA LL DEMETRI'S WOODSTONE TAVERNA 360484 SPIRITS/BR/WN REST LOUNGE + 101 MAIN ST EDMONDS WA 98020 3131 AM-5723 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: Consent Submitted For: Rob English Department: Engineering Review Committee: Parks/Planning/Public Works Type: Action Tnfnrmntinn Submitted By: 3. D. Robert English Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Subject Title Authorization for Mayor to approve acceptance of right of way and easements from the Kwon Trust property for the Five Corners Roundabout Project. Recommendation Authorize Mayor to accept and sign the right of way and easement documents for the Kwon Trust Property. Previous Council Action On March 12, 2013, the Planning, Parks and Public Works Committee reviewed this item and recommended it be placed on the consent agenda for approval. Narrative The City has reached an agreement with the owner of the Kwon Trust property to purchase 784 square feet of right of way and 1,309 square feet of temporary construction easement for the Five Corners Roundabout project. The total compensation provided to the property owner is $27,800 and this cost will be funded by a federal transportation grant and a 13.5% local match (112 Street Fund). The Kwon Trust property is located on the west side of the Five Corners intersection. Statutory Warranty Deed Inbox Engineering Public Works City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Robert English Final Approval Date: 05/03/2013 AttnrhmPntc Form Review Reviewed By Date Robert English 05/02/2013 04:57 PM Phil Williams 05/02/2013 05:20 PM Linda Hynd 05/02/2013 05:21 PM Dave Earling 05/03/2013 08:21 AM Linda Hynd 05/03/2013 08:35 AM Started On: 05/02/2013 01:06 PM Packet Page 114 of 266 Return Address: City of Edmonds 121 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Bertrand Hauss STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Grantors: Soon Be Kwon and Chung Hee Kwon Revocable Trust Grantee: City of Edmonds, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington Abbreviated Legal: Ptn of Lot 19, Blk 5, Aiderwood Manor #9, V 10, P 6 Additional legal on: Exhibit "A" Tax Parcel No.: 003736-005-019-03 Five Corners Roundabout Intersection Improvement Project THE GRANTOR, Soon Bo Kwon and Chung Hee Kwon Revocable Trust, Chung Hee Kwon, as Trustee, for and in consideration of Nineteen Thousand Six Hundred and NO/100ths Dollars and Other Good and Valuable Consideration ($19,600.00) and under threat of the exercise of eminent domain, conveys and warrants to the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation, the real property described in Exhibit "A" and depicted in Exhibit "B° herewith attached and made a part hereof, and any after -acquired interest therein, to the same extent and purpose as if the rights granted herein had been acquired by eminent domain under the laws or the State of Washington. The lands herein described contain an area of 784 square feet, more or less, the specific details concerning all of which are to be found in that certain map of definite location now of record and on file in the Office of the City Engineer in Edmonds, Washington, and entitled Five Corners Roundabout Intersection Improvement Project. It is understood and agreed that delivery of the deed is hereby tendered and that the terms and obligations hereof shall not become binding upon the City of Edmonds unless and until accepted and approved by the City Council of the City of Edmonds, as indicated by the signature of the City Mayor, below. Page 1 of 3 Tax Parcel No. 003736-005-019-03 Packet Page 115 of 266 The Grantor hereby requests the Assessor -Treasurer of said County to set -over to the remainder the lien of all unpaid taxes, if any, affecting the real property hereby conveyed, as provided by RCW 84.60.070. Dated this i day of Accepted and Approved by Grantor Soon Bo Kwon and Chung Hee Kwon Revocable Trust Printed Name: Title: ' Date: o t3 4,c, � Accepted and Approved by Grantee CITY OF EDMONDS (MAYOR) Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM Bv: Office of the City Attorney 20 By: Printed Name: Title: Date: ATTESTED/AUTHENTICATED By: Sandy S. Chase, City Clerk Page 2 of 3 Tax Parcel No. 003736-005-019-03 Packet Page 116 of 266 STATE OF WASHINGTON } } SS. County of } I certify that 1 know or have satisfactory evidence that Chung Hee Kwon is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that she signed this instrument, on oath stated that she is authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Trustee of Soon Bo Kwon and Chung Hee Kwon Revocable Trust, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED:G U' -, Name (typed or printed): 'tJ9q, f NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington .•��` pERS !� I'll. Residing at ✓1-� t ,P/ i4 My appointment expires: /61 0 01 Page 3 of 3 Tax Parcel No. 003736-005-019-03 Packet Page 117 of 266 EXHIBIT A RIGHT OF WAY_ ACQUISITION LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARENT PARCEL: AI. L THAT PORTION OF LOT 19, BLOCK 5, ALDERWOOD MANOR NO, 9, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OIL PLATS, PAGE 6, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISII COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING- AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE 230 FEETNORTHEASTERLY OFTHE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 19; THI.NCE NORTH 7000' WEST 162,5 FEET; THENCE NORTH 64"43' EASI' PARALLEL TO SAID SOUTH LINE 18.83 FEET TO THE WEST MARGIN OF COUNTY ROAD SURVEY NO. 1204; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID ROAD TO THE WEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF SAID ROAD WITH BOWDOIN NORTH TRUNK AND LYNN ROADS; THENCE SOUTIIWESTERLY ALONG NORTH LINE OF SAID BOWDOIN WAY AND THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 19 FOR 12111 FEET, MORE- OR LESS, TO TIIIE POINT OF BEGINNING. RIGHT OF WAY ACO"01SITION: A PORTION OF TIIE ABOVE DIESCRIBED PARENT PARCEL MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THEE M0NUMI;N'T1 I) SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 27 NOR'TII, RANGE,' 4 EAST, W.M. THENCE SOUI`II 64057'47" WEST" ALONG TIIE CIENTERLINE OF BOWDOIN WAY FOR A DIS`I'ANCI-: OF 179.94 FEET; THENCE NORTH 25"02' 13" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEETTO T'IIfE NORTH MARGIN SAID BOWDOIN WAY AND TEL WEST LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARENT PARCEEL; THENCE NORTH 64°57'47" BAST ALONG SAID NORTH MARGIN FOR A DISTANCE OIL 49.42 1jEE'T TO 'i IIE'I'RUL POINTOF BEGINNING" TTIENC:IE CONTINUING NORTH 64057'47" EAST ALONG SAID NOR'I"II MARGIN FORA. DISTANCE OF 75,95 FE ET TO THIS WEST MARGIN OF MAIN S'TRFEIET AND'I'O A POINT ON T'HE ARC OF A NON -TAN GENTIA1, CURVE WHOSE CENTER 131.ARS SOUTH 58050' 16 "W1:EST HAVING A RADIUS OF 293.43 FEET; `I'IlFNCE, NOR'IT-Ii?RLY ALONG SAID WEST MARGIN AND ALONG THE ARC OIL SAID CURVE AND A 'THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4042'26" FOR A DISTANCE OF 24_I I FEEET"TO A Packet Page 118 of 266 POINI` ON "THE ARC OF A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE WHOSECENTER BEARS NORTH 53"39'44" WEST LAVING A RADIUS OF 22,00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVETHROUGH A CENTRAL. ANGLE OF 6044'56" FOR A DISTANCE OF 2.591;EET"T0 A POINT ON TIIls ARC OF A COMPOUND CURVE. TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 387.00 FEET; '111ENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG TIME ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL, ANGLE OF 2047' 18" FOR A DISTANCE OF 18.83 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34048'29" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.01 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE WHOSE CENTER BEARS NORTH 42033'54" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 394.75 THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONNG'THF, ARCOF SAID CURVR, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6033'21" FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.17 FEET TO TI- E TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING , CONTAINING 784 SQUARE FEET, MORL OR LESS, SITUATE IN T141- CITY OF IEDMONDS, SNOT-IOMISR COUNTY, WASHING'TON. EXHIBIT "A" Packet Page 119 of 266 \ \ I � I a \ F \ I � � I \ J N',.#\ \ KWON ;yr`1 ' JJJ \L FOUND CONCRETE G� MON WITH BRASS RIVET IN CASE 30+0 0 TPOB ROW ACQUISITION STA 31-+30,53, 30.00' RT TPOB TEMP CONST. ESMT STA 31+79.94, 30.00' RT i i FOUND CASED MON "'o 00 Co �s `N89'23'10"W LEGEND nz RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION AREA ® TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT AREA — — — EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY ?JLA 11/14/12 1:34Dm — D:\WORK—ACAD—HOME\Ac EXHIBIT B DATE 11-9-12 DESIGN: 9)a Fib COEDD003 / svEM44coed0003 DRANK: 9]Io a 10 20 40 UNDAVID $VANS "D A88pC [AT E8 15Ic. 1620 W. Marine'A— Drive. S.k 200 E—tl W.hhgtan 95201 Phan.: 425.250.4099 -' I LINE TABLE LINE BEARING DISTANCE L1 N64-57'47'E 75.95' L2 S34'48'29"W 10.01' CURVE TABLE CURVE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH Cl 4'42'26" 293.43' 24.11' C2 6'44'56" 22.00' 2.59' C3 2.47'18" 387.00' 18.83' C4 6'33'21" 394.75' 45.17' FIVE CORNERS RIGHT—OF—WAY ACQUISTION CHUNG HFF KWON Packet Page 120 of 266 AM-5725 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: Consent Submitted For: Rob English Department: Engineering Review Committee: Parks/Planning/Public Works Type: Action Tnfnrmntinn Submitted By: 3. E. Megan Luttrell Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Subject Title Authorization for Mayor to approve acceptance of right of way and easements from the Development Services of America property for the Five Corners Roundabout Project. Recommendation Authorize Mayor to accept and sign the right of way and easement documents for the Development Services of America Property. Previous Council Action On March 12, 2013, the Planning, Parks and Public Works Committee reviewed this item and recommended it be placed on the consent agenda for approval. Narrative The City has reached an agreement with the owner of the Development Services of America property to purchase 448 square feet of right of way, 16 square feet of landscape easement and 1,104 square feet of temporary construction easement for the Five Corners Roundabout project. The total compensation provided to the property owner is $22,950 and this cost will be funded by a federal transportation grant and a 13.5% local match (112 Street Fund). The Development Services of America property is located on the northwest corner of Five Corners intersection. Statutory Warranty Deed Landscaping Easement Inbox Reviewed By Engineering Robert English Public Works Phil Williams City Clerk Linda Hynd Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Linda Hynd Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Final Approval Date: 05/03/2013 Attachments Form Review Date 05/02/2013 04:57 PM 05/02/2013 05:20 PM 05/02/2013 05:21 PM 05/03/2013 08:21 AM 05/03/2013 08:35 AM Started On: 05/02/2013 03:10 PM Packet Page 121 of 266 Packet Page 122 of 266 Return Address: City of Edmonds 121 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Bertrand Hauss STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Grantor: Development Services of America Grantee: City of Edmonds, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington Abbreviated Legal: Ptn of tract 19, Blk 5, Alderwood Manor #9, V 10, P6 Additional legal on: Exhibit "A" Tax Parcel No.: 003736-005-019-02 Five Corners Roundabout Intersection Improvement Project THE GRANTOR, Development Services of America, a Delaware Corporation for and in consideration of Eight Thousand Three Hundred and no/100ths Dollars and Other Good and Valuable Consideration ($8,300.00) and under threat of the exercise of eminent domain, conveys and warrants to the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation, the real property described in Exhibit "A" and depicted in Exhibit "B" herewith attached and made a part hereof, and any after -acquired interest therein, to the same extent and purpose as if the rights granted herein had been acquired by eminent domain under the laws or the State of Washington. The lands herein described contain an area of 448 square feet, more or less, the specific details concerning all of which are to be found in that certain map of definite location now of record and on file in the Office of the City Engineer in Edmonds, Washington, and entitled Five Corners Roundabout Intersection Improvement Project. It is understood and agreed that delivery of the deed is hereby tendered and that the terms and obligations hereof shall not become binding upon the City of Edmonds unless and until accepted and approved by the City Council of the City of Edmonds, as indicated by the signature of the City Mayor, below. Page 1 of 3 Tax Parcel No.: 003736-005-019-02 Packet Page 123 of 266 The Grantor hereby requests the Assessor -Treasurer of said County to set -over to the remainder the lien of all unpaid taxes, if any, affecting the real property hereby conveyed, as provided by RCW 84.60.070. Dated this ,�~ . 01 day of .N V CGV , 20✓.5 . Accepted and Approved by Grantor Development Services of America By: - Prin ed Name: i2/cAPAZQ H Title: Date: 3 _}x5- Accepted and Approved by Grantee CITY OF EDMONDS (MAYOR) M Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM By: Office of the City Attorney By: Printed Name: Title: Date: ATTESTED/AUTHENTICATED Bv: Sandy S. Chase, City Clerk Page 2 of 3 Tax Parcel No.: 003736-005-019-02 Packet Page 124 of 266 STATE OF ARIZONA } �� } SS. County of I�11`5 j-1 CODA } certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 91 2D \UL i� and is re) the person(s) who appeared before me, and said person(s) acknowledged that 6e she/they) signed this instrument, on oath stated that (he is/she is /they are) authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the E L) y. and of Development Services of America, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED: 03'2(,nI) 3 CODa OFFICIAL SEAR JOSEPf-f HORVATH NOTARY PUBLIC State of Arizonill ARICOPA COUNTY sly Comm. Explres Oct, 24, 201 cpa A, / (Q� Name/(typed or printed): _—f LYIP:HH02Lf\-H NOTARY PUBUG in aO for _� he State of Arizona Residing at I1-A[d WPA a, My appointment expires: 40 Page 3 of 3 Tax Parcel No.: 003736-005-019-02 Packet Page 125 of 266 EXHIBIT A RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION LEGAL DESCRIPTION PAR NT PARCEL: THAT PORTION OF TRACT 19, BLOCK 5, ALDERWOOD MANOR NO. 9, ACCORDING "I'O n-II~, PLATTHEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 6, RE -CORDS OF SNOIIOMISI-I COIJNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING NORTHEASTERLY ERLY OF COUNTY ROAD (NORTH TRUNK ROAD). TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE' SOUTHWESTERLY ONE-IIALF OF VACATED ALOHA ROAD ADJACENT THERETO. I2U TIT OF WAY ACQUISITION: A PORTION OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARENT .PARCEL MOR1: PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING- AT TIJE MONUMENT EM SOUTH QUARTER C01ZNER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 4 I AST, W.M. THT ANC E.' NORTH 0037'45" EAST ALONG THE CIsN'1'I3RLINF' Ol' 84TI' AVI; WESTFOR A DISTAN(J',' Ol', 88.75 FLIs"I; TI-IENCI" NORTH 89022' 15" WE"ST FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.00 IN ER:SI'sCTION OF TI-I1s' WIsS'1' MARGIN OFSAID 84�r` AVEWi::S'1' 11ND "I'IIl; NOR'I'[I NfAR.G1N OFMAIN S'TIEET AND'I'I EI TRIJI POINTOF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTFI 0037'45" EAST ALONC3 SAID WESTMARGIN FOR A DISTANCE OF 20.23 FELT TO A POINT ON `IT E' ARC OF A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE. WHOSI; CENTER BEARS NORTH 25"42' 19" WFST I IAVING A RADIUS OF 22.00 FF T; I'I]I NCT WIiST E'RLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVETHROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OI" 4-0"06'07" FOR A DISTANCE OIL 15.40 TWEET; THENCE NORTH 75036' 12" WESTFOR A DISTANCE OF 9.97 FFfl F TO A POINT ON TI-IF ARC; OF A TANGENTIAL CURVETOTI-IF RIGHTHAVING A RADIUS OF 47.781 T'1II=iN('I? Wt sTj,RLY ALONG'ruE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGII A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10"58'4.5" FOR A DISTANCE OF 9.15 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC: O A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE` WHOSE CEN FR BEIARS NORTH 24059'27" EASTHAVING A RADIUS OF 389.00 T-FET; 'I H NC'Is WE STERLY ALONG THR, ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUC7II A C1::N'l'I.ZAI.. ANGLE OF 504-9 15" FOR A DISTANCE OF 39:52 FEET TO TI-It,, NORTH MARGIN OF SAID MAIN S"I'RI"IET Packet Page 126 of 266 AND TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE WHOSE CENTER BEARS NORTH 36"25'51" EAST HAVIN(.i A RADIUS OF 543,69 TWEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONGTHE SAID NORTH MARGIN AND ARC: OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 8°28' 18" FOR A DISTANCE OF 80.39 FEl?'I' TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONT AININ(J 448 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. SITUATE IN TIIE CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASBINGTON. 7. �Ll.�Y.L"5S5S'SSSSSSSS EXHIBIT "A" Packet Page 127 of 266 LINE TABLE LINE BEARING DISTANCE L1 N00'37'45"E 20.23' L2 N75'36'12"W 9.97' CURVE TABLE CURVE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH Cl 40'06'07" 22.00' 15.40' C2 1 D'58'45" 47.78' 9.15, C3 5*49'15" 389.00' 39.52' C4 8'28'18" 543.69' 80.39' { ` r`J "JJ 5' \ PACIFIC GAMBLE \ ROBINSON CO. \ \ Ih , "v,�1 . R, VV, 1;600500I902 \ 5' TEMP CO ESMT STA 11 +08.98, 30.00' LT LANDSCAPE \ ESMT \ STA 11 +08.75, 50.80' LT 0 10 20 40 LEGEND 0 RIGHT—OF—WAY ACQUISITION AREA ® TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT AREA ® LANDSCAPE EASEMENT AREA ---- EXISTING RIGHT—OF—WAY PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY EXHIBIT B DATE: 11-9-12 DESIGN: gja FLL COED0003 / svEM05coed0003 DRAWN; upo C3 C2 TPOB ROW ACQUISITION STA 10+88.75, 30.00' LT A=4T32'14" R=573.69' L=47` I FOUND CASED MON W/ COPPER TACK I 30' 1 Q � n C) 0 z 11+00 N89'22'15"W ,cam �30.00'co I/per co M. *0 it FOUND CONCRETE MON WITH BRASS RIVET IN CASE FIVE CORNERS AN AVID VANS RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISTION ATES1Na. 1620 W. W.d.'A—Dtive, S71 200 PACIFIC GAMBLE ROBINSON E—U Wmhingt.. 982C1 Ph—: 425.259.4099 Packet Page 128 of 266 After Recording Return To: City of Edmonds 121 — 5'" Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Bertrand Hauss EASEMENT FOR LANDSCAPING Grantor: Development Services of America Grantee: City of Edmonds, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington Abbreviated Legal: Ptn of Tract 19, Blk 5, Alderwood Manor #9, V 10, P 6 Additional legal on: Exhibit "A" Tax Parcel No.: 003736-005-019-02 Five Corners Roundabout Intersection Improvement Project This agreement is and entered into by and between Development Services of America, a Delaware Corporation, the owner of the property described below (hereinafter "Owner"), and the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"). WHEREAS, the City desires to use certain property of the owner for the purpose of installing street trees and irrigation; including construction, repairing and maintaining the landscaping (hereinafter "Landscaping") associated with the Five Corners Roundabout Intersection Improvement Project ("Project"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the undersigned owners hereby grant to the City, or its assigns, subject to the conditions hereafter set forth, a permanent nonexclusive easement over and through the property of the Owner at 8401 Main St, Edmonds, WA ("Property") for construction, repairing and maintaining the ("Landscaping"). The easement area is depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit B and further described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. 1. General Provisions. This easement is granted and accepted subject to the following conditions: 1.1 That, upon completion of any repair or maintenance work, the City shall leave the premises substantially the same as it was on the day work commenced; 1.2 That the City shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless owners from any claim or damage which might arise as a result of the work performed; Hasemem for Landscaping Packet Page 129 of 266 1.3 That the owners shall not obstruct the easement premises in any manner that will prevent or interfere with the use of the easement for the purposes identified herein, or allow any third party to obstruct the premises in a manner that will prevent or interfere with use of the easement for the purposes identified here. 1.4 This agreement and all of the terms, conditions, rights and obligations herein contained shall be binding upon the parties hereto, their successors, lessees and assigns. Dated this --25rH day of /M12e-ii , 2013 Development Services of America By xv Primed Name: -r,(y~ 1-fAIiL�2'.✓ Title: J�iZts'/L Date: Accepted and Approved by Grantee CITY OF EDMONDS (MAYOR) in Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM Bv: Office of the City Attorney Eascmcnt For Landscaping By: Printed Name: Title: Date: ATTESTED/AUTHENTICATED BV: Sandy S. Chase, City Clerk Packet Page 130 of 266 STATE OF ARIZONA } } ss. County of 10VI LOPA } I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that OC MBA) l 'k i and (is)/are) the person(s) who appeared before me, and said person(s) acknowledged that 0(�eshe/they) signed this instrument, on oath stated that (he �is�/-shhe is /they arp) authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the and of Development Services of America, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED: O 2(j-3 OFFICIAL. SEAL IIII JOSEPH HORVATH r 0* NOTARY PUBLIC State of Arizona G MARICGPA Gntjwn, A4 Comm. Expires Get. 24.2014 Easement for Landscaping Nam (typed or printed): _ . 1[�� -H ffC)[ VN- H, NOTARY PL4 LIC in an for the St to of Arizona Residing at II My appointment expires: 7z Packet Page 131 of 266 EXHIBIT A LANDSCAPE EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARENT PARCEL: `€'HAT PORTION OF 'TRAC"I' 19, BLOCK 5, ALDERWOO➢ MANOR NO. 9, ACCORDING TO TmE PLAT'I Jll-.;REEF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 6, RECORDS OF SNOITOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING NOR"I'H ASTFRLY OF COUNTY ROAD (NOR'I'll TRUNK ROAD). TOGETHER WITHTHAT IAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY ONE-IIALF OF VACATED ALOHA ROAD ADJACI3NT 'THEIZ.I TO. LANDSCAPE EASEMENT: A PORTION OF THE ABOVF DESCRIBED PARENT' PARCEL MORE PAI; IFICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS. COMMENCING A'I"1'I-II? MONUMI NI'I D SOUTH QLJAR'T1 R CORNER OF SECTION J 9, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTII, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M. THENCE NORTH 0"37'45" EAST ALONG 'THE C` ENTERI.1Nl''l OF 84"' AV1 WEST I�'OR A DISTANCE OF 108.75 1{EE'1; THENCE NORTH 89022' 15" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.80 I�I 1•�1"I'O 'l']I1's'l'1�U13 POIN'€' OI BEGINNING; TI IENCE NORTH 14°23'48" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 4.00 Fl,'E ; THENCE NOR`I'l€ 75036' 12" W.l'�S'T FOR A DISTANCP OF 4.00 FEET; THI NCI', SOUTH I4°23'48" Wl' S'T FOR A DISTANCE', OF 4.00 Fl,E ; TU NCE, SOUI'I1 75036' 12" H AST FOR A DISTANCE OF 4.00 FEET TO TIIE 'I`IZUI31'O111]' OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 16 SQI.JARI, FEET, MORFa OR LESS. SITUATE IN'T1=1E CITY OF l DMONDS, SNOIIOMISII COUNTY, WASHINC;3 TUN. I - k� - (2� whsy, Packet Page 132 of 266 LINE TABLE LINE BEARING DISTANCE L1 NOO'37'45"E 20.23' L2 N75'36'12"W 9.97' CURVE TABLE CURVE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH Cl 40'06'07" 22.00' 15,40' C2_ 10'58'45" 47.78' 9.15' C3 5'49'15" 389.00' 39.52' C4 8'28'18" 543,69' 80.39' \ PACIFIC GAMBLE \ ROBINSON CO. k \, P 1 RR'_'EE. u AFY\ UUv73600V,..UI— O eyrl' r \ 5' TEMP CONST. ESMT STA 11+08.98, cS�je 30.00' LT 30' C3 \ LANDSCAPE 02 C2/;C \ \ ESMT STA 11+08.75, 50.80' LT ` \ TPOB \ ROW ACQUISITION STA 10+88.75, \ 30.00' LT 9 113 2p 49 LEGEND RIGHT OF —WAY ACQUISITION AREA ® TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT AREA ® LANDSCAPE EASEMENT AREA ---- EXISTING RIGHT—OF—WAY PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY FXHIBIT B DATE 11-9-12 DESSN; gju Fit COED0003 /svEM05cved0003 DRAWN: gja R=573.69' L=47f II I FOUND CASED MON W/ COPPER TACK u I N7 I a � n C) 0 J 11t00 / N89'22'15"W 4, / �30,00' !/ h LO / 00co / 1 d- FOUND CONCRETE MON WITH BRASS RIVET IN CASE FIVE CORNERS 0"10 EVANS RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISTION ANeASSOCIATES ]NO. 182CW. MarineM— Dme, S.M2Cp PACIFIC GAMBLE ROBINSON E_a Washington 982C1 Phone: 425,259,40G9 Packet Page 133 of 266 AM-5721 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted By: Sandy Chase Department: City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Type: Information Information Subject Title Community Service Announcement: Memorial Day Ceremony Recommendation For information. Previous Council Action N/A Committee Action: 9, Narrative Dale Hoggins, a member of the Edmonds Cemetery Board, will provide information regarding the upcoming Memorial Day Program at the Edmonds Memorial Cemetery. Inbox Mayor Finalize for Agenda Fonn Started By: Sandy Chase Final Approval Date: 05/02/2013 Form Review Reviewed By Date Dave Earling 05/02/2013 10:49 AM Linda Hynd 05/02/2013 11:14 AM Started On: 05/02/2013 09:35 AM Packet Page 134 of 266 AM-5705 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Review Committee: Type: Information Tnfnrmntinn Subject Title Proclamation declaring May "Puget Sound Starts Here Month". Recommendation Previous Council Action Submitted By: Committee Action: 5. Carolyn LaFave Narrative Together we have the power to fix Puget Sound. Just a few simple changes will make a significant difference. If each of the more than 4 million people living in the 12 counties that make-up the Puget Sound region makes even one small change, our combined efforts will have a tremendous positive impact. "Puget Sound Starts Here Month" in Edmonds will bring attention and focus to the issue of local and regional water quality and provide educational opportunities for the public to learn how they can help clean-up Puget Sound and our local waterways. PSSH May 2013 Inbox Reviewed By Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 04/29/2013 Attnehmpntc Form Review Date 04/29/2013 10:52 AM 04/29/2013 01:43 PM Started On: 04/25/2013 09:37 AM Packet Page 135 of 266 ��LICl%C11��X�till'� City of Edmonds • Office of the Mayor PugetSoundo "Puget Sound Starts Here Month" starts Here May 2013 WHEREAS, Puget Sound contributes in numerous ways to the city's economic infrastructure and to our unparalleled natural resource base; and WHEREAS, Puget Sound is an important part of the identity and character of the City of Edmonds; and WHEREAS, the water quality of Puget Sound and its tributaries is a priority for the safety, health, and welfare of the citizens of Edmonds; and WHEREAS, millions of pounds of pollutants enter Puget Sound every year as a result of rain washing over yard chemicals, pet waste, oil, soaps, and other substances that run off into storm drains and streams connected to Puget Sound; and WHEREAS, educational initiatives such as the regional "Puget Sound Starts Here" campaign serve to protect and improve local water quality; and WHEREAS, "Puget Sound Starts Here Month" will bring attention and focus to the issue of local and regional water quality and provide educational opportunities for the public to learn how they can help clean-up Puget Sound and our local waterways; and WHEREAS, all Puget Sound residents have the ability to take action to reduce their individual and cumulative impact on the water quality of Puget Sound and local waterways; NOW, THEREFORE, I, Dave Earling, Mayor, do hereby proclaim May 2013 as: "Puget Sound Starts Here Month "in Edmonds and encourage all citizens to take action by attending local and regional events and to adopt behaviors in their daily lives to help to protect and clean-up Puget Sound and our local waterways. Dave Tarling, MayorT May 7, 2013 Packet Page 136 of 266 AM-5711 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Review Committee: Type: Information Tnfnrmatinn Subject Title Proclamation in honor of National Police Week, May 12 - 18, 2013. Recommendation Previous Council Action Submitted By: Committee Action: 717 Carolyn LaFave Narrative On May 15, 1982, the first National Peace Officers' Memorial Day service was held. Activities during the National Police Week now include the annual Candlelight Vigil at the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial, National Police Survivors' Conference, as well as the National Peace Officers' Memorial Day Service. While police agencies may have celebrated National Police Week on the local level years ago, today there is a new heightened awareness of National Police Week. The U.S. Congress has passed legislation that allows the U.S. flag to be flown at half-staff on May 15; numerous police organizations hold memorial services locally, regionally, and on a statewide level during that week; and police departments host open houses to promote National Police Week. National Police Week provides an opportunity for us to honor those officers who serve and protect our communities every day, putting their lives on the line for us, and serves as a reminder to the public, that many law enforcement officers have paid the ultimate price and given their lives in the line of duty. Attachments NPW ?()]'A Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 04/30/2013 05:02 PM Mayor Dave Earling 05/01/2013 03:54 PM Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Started On: 04/30/2013 02:28 PM Final Approval Date: 05/01/2013 Packet Page 137 of 266 1jr1oIrtamattloru City of Edmonds • Office of the Mayor National Police Week 2013 To recognize National Police Week 2013 and to honor the service and sacrifice of those law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty while protecting our communities and safeguarding our democracy. WHEREAS, there are approximately 900,000 law enforcement officers serving in communities across the United States, including 51 sworn members of the Edmonds Police Department; and WHEREAS, some 60,000 assaults against law enforcement officers are reported each year, resulting in approximately 16,000 injuries; and WHEREAS, Since the first recorded death in 1792, almost 20,000 law enforcement officers in the United States have made the ultimate sacrifice and been killed in the line of duty; and WHEREAS, the names of these dedicated public servants are engraved on the walls of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in Washington, ❑.C.; and WHEREAS, 120 law enforcement officers were killed in the line of duty in 2012, and thus far 37+ officers have been killed in 2013; and WHEREAS, the service and sacrifice of all officers killed in the line of duty was honored, and the names of the officers newly engraved on the Memorial was formally dedicated, during the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund 's 251" Annual Candlelight Vigil, on the evening of Monday, May 13, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Candlelight Vigil is part of National Police Week, which takes place this year on May 12-18; and WHEREAS, May 15 is designated as Peace Officers Memorial Day, in honor of fallen officers and their families; NOW THEREFORE, I, David O. Earling, Mayor, do hereby proclaim May 12- l 8, 2013, as Police Week In the City of Edmonds and publicly salute the service of law enforcement officers in our corAmunity and across the nation. David O. Earling, Mayor May 7, 2013 Packet Page 138 of 266 AM-5707 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: 15 Minutes Submitted For: Council President Petso Department: City Council Review Committee: Type: Information Tnffher"0 finn Submitted By: Committee Action: Subject Title Presentation by Nick Brossoit, Superintendent, Edmonds School District #15. Recommendation N/A Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Presentation by Nick Brossoit, Superintendent, Edmonds School District #15. Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Linda Hynd Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 05/02/2013 Form Review Date 05/02/2013 09:34 AM 05/02/2013 10:50 AM 05/02/2013 11:14 AM Started On: 04/26/2013 09:32 AM Jana Spellman Packet Page 139 of 266 AM-5712 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: 15 Minutes Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Review Committee: Type: Information Tnfnrm.]+inn Submitted By: Committee Action: J, Carolyn LaFave Subject Title Update on the Edmonds Sister City Commission by Michelle Van Tassell, Commission Chair. Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Commission Chair, Michelle Van Tassell will provide a summary of the 2013 Mayor's Delegation trip to Hekinan, Japan, as well as go over the Commission's 5-year plan. A list of the delegates who traveled with the Mayor is attached. A copy of the Commission's 5-year plan has also been attached. It is the mission of the Sister City Commission to promote international communication and understanding through exchanges of people, ideas, and culture. ESCC 5 yr plan 2013 delegates Inbox Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 05/02/2013 Attachments Form Review Reviewed By Date Linda Hynd 05/02/2013 02:11 PM Started On:05/01/2013 10:27 AM Packet Page 140 of 266 Edmonds Sister City Five -Year Plan 12012-2017 Goals Objectives Description/Tactics Lead Timeline Budget Person/Committee 1.SCC Organization Recruit and Maintain 12 • Orientation Ray Olitt Ongoing N/A and Programs commissioners & one • Individual meeting Michelle Van Tassell student representative with Chair or Vice- Student Rep Chair annually for • Recruit Student Rep school year • Identify Commissioner Roles Recruit and Maintain Pool of • Recruit/Screen Yoshi Inoue Ongoing N/A Host Families • Correspondence Michelle Van Tassell • Personal Connection • Public Recognition Adult Delegation to Japan • Recruit lyoko Okano April, 2013 N/A • Orientation Beth Fuhriman -Completed- • Select Gift • Post -Trip De -briefing and reporting options Student Delegation to Japan • Maintain 10-15 Kay Vreeland Aug'13-Mar'14 N/A Students Beth Fuhriman for July2014 • Recruit from both Michelle Rockstead trip Public & Private MS (81h Gr) & HS • Recruit chaperones • Orientation • Post -Trip De -briefing and assignment • Utilize District & In - School advertising (e- newsletters, etc Rev 04/13 1 Packet Page 141 of 266 Edmonds Sister City Five -Year Plan 12012-2017 Goals Objectives Description/Tactics Lead Timeline Budget Person/Committee SCC Organization Adult Delegation from Japan; . Culture Night lyoko Okano October, 2013 $15,000 (est) and Programs 25-Year Anniversary • Itinerary Marlene Friend (Cont.) • Correspondence Rita Ikeda • Printed Materials (All by Committee) Student Delegation from • Create Itinerary Rita Ikeda August, 2014 $3000 per (est) Hekinan • Recruit Student Ray Olitt Volunteers Michelle Rockstead • Orientation e De -Brief & Report Maintain & Keep Current • Clarify Volunteer Roles Carolyn LaFave Ongoing N/A Database of Friends of SCC & e Recruit new members Joseph Fletcher Other Adult Volunteers . Community Events Support Hekinan's AET • Recruit Paul Anderson Selection: Feb- N/A e Application/Interview Ray Olitt May, 2013 Process lyoko Okano • Orientation Ongoing • Develop/Maintain Communication Plan e De -Brief & Report Maintain organization of • Update usable forms Rita Ikeda Ongoing N/A documents & inventoried • Archive obsolete forms Kay Vreeland items • Inventory Hekinan Beth Fuhriman collection (gifts, lyoko Okano artifacts, photos) Kody McConnell Rev o4/13 2 Packet Page 142 of 266 Edmonds Sister City Five -Year Plan 2012-2017 Goals Objectives Description/Tactics Lead Timeline Budget Person/Committee 2.SCC Community Visibility with Mayor & Civic • Quarterly Report to Michelle Van Tassell Ongoing N/A Visibility Leaders City Council by Chair Michelle Rockstead • Annual Report by Student Rep Outreach/Networking/Events • Chamber of Commerce Yoshi Inoue Ongoing $250/yr (est) • Service Organizations Marlene Friend • Farmer's Market Jill Van Berkom • Arts Commission • Garden Club • 4t" of July Parade • Attend other SC events Cultural Education • Creative Retirement Ray Olitt Ongoing N/A Institute Beth Fuhriman • Educational Displays: Rita Ikeda Library, Senior Center, Michelle Rockstead Car Show • School Activities On-line/Print Advertising & e Create new banner Kody McConnell Ongoing $250 (est) Exposure • Beacon articles Paul Anderson • Online News Kay Vreeland • Social networking Marlene Friend • Branding with logo Jill Van Berkom • Brochures • Broadly advertise all SCC events • Seattle Magazine Rev 04/13 3 Packet Page 143 of 266 Edmonds Sister City Five -Year Plan 12012-2017 Goals Objectives Description/Tactics Lead Timeline Budget Person/Committee 3. Establish Annual Membership Drive • Update database Joseph Fletcher Summer 2013 $150 (est) Sustainable • Create & Send Funding mailer/e-mailer • Publish Members List Pursue Grant Opportunities • Hazel Miller Kody McConnell Ongoing N/A Foundation Michelle Van Tassell • Hubbard Family Foundation • Rotary Club • Student Travel Grants Community -Based • Flea Market Marlene Friend Ongoing N/A Fundraising • Silent Auction • Small donation opportunities Rev 04/13 4 Packet Page 144 of 266 Hekjnd�� 9� A Cdp of Edmonds sSister City Co 2013 Mayor's Delegation to Hekinan, Japan 1. Paul Anderson, Sister City Commissioner 2. Melody & David Benton, Mortgage Broker 3. Phill Butler, International Journalist 4. Ron & Michelle Clyborne, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce President / Real Estate 5. Jim Corbett, Retired Teacher 6. Mayor Dave Earling & Sue Earling 7. Pamela Erickson, Accountant & ESL Teacher 8. Carolyn Fenning, Volunteer 9. Beth Fuhriman, Sister City Commissioner 10.Karen Heines, Writer 11.Graham Humphrey, Retired Librarian & Floretum Garden Club member 12.Yoshitaka Inoue & wife, Sister City Commissioner 13.Christi Jenkins, Community Volunteer 14.Carl Jensen, past AET 15.Chrystal Lanning, Community Volunteer 16.Darlene Miller, Edmonds Resident 17.Marni Muir, Arts Commissioner 18.1yoko Okano, Sister City Commissioner 19.Shigeki Okano, Business Owner 20.Duncan Ridell, Physician 21.Shiva Ridell, Trainer 22.Christopher Rockstead, Engineer 23.Michelle Rockstead, Student and Sister City Student Representative Packet Page 145 of 266 AM-5729 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: Submitted By: Department: Review Committee: Type: 10 Minutes Stephen Clifton Community Services Information Information Subject Title Presentation on the North Sound SeaWolves semi -pro soccer team. Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Committee Action: 10. Jim Underhill, General Manager for the North Sound SeaWolves FC will be presenting information about Sea Wolves which play their home games at the Edmonds Woodway High School Stadium. The Premiere Development League (PDL) — The top development league in North America, the 2013 PDL feature 65 teams, in four conferences, throughout the U.S. and Canada (one team is located in Bermuda). The 14 game summer season allows elite college players an opportunity to play a higher level of soccer competition, while remaining eligible. The PDL has proven to be an important step for professional soccer players throughout North America. PDL Highlights — The 2013 MLS Super Draft included 6 former PDL players among the top 10 selections, with 27 former PDL players selected overall. In the past four seasons, 137 of the 194 players selected in the Super Draft, have played with PDL teams, a remarkable 71 percent of MLS selections. The Northwest Division — The North Sound SeaWolves play in the 7-team Northwest Division. Considered a highly competitive Division, teams from Vancouver, Victoria, Portland and around Puget Sound have enjoyed recent national achievements. The Portland Timbers PDL team was the national champion in 2010. In 2011, the Kitsap Pumas won the PDL title. And last year, 2012, the Seattle Sounders PDL team reached the national semi-final contest. SeaWolves PDL Highlights — While a PDL team for 3 years, the SeaWolves have are making headway already. The team has recruited players from many Northwest colleges, and several players from other countries. Of note, Abduwali Aman (UW) was selected for the national Ethiopian Team, as it prepares for the World Cup in 2014. Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Linda Hynd 05/03/2013 08:37 AM Packet Page 146 of 266 Mayor Dave Earling 05/03/2013 02:35 PM Finalize for Agenda Linda Hynd 05/03/2013 02:42 PM Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Started On: 05/03/2013 08:10 AM Final Approval Date: 05/03/2013 Packet Page 147 of 266 AM-5722 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: Submitted By: Department: Review Committee: Type: 20 Minutes Michael Clugston Planning Action Information Committee Action: it. Subject Title Closed -record review of the Planning Board's recommendation to approve a City -sponsored rezone at 22133 and 22121 76th Avenue West (File No. PLN20130008). Recommendation At a public hearing held on March 27, 2013, the Planning Board voted unanimously to approve the proposed rezone (Exhibit 1). Previous Council Action The topic was introduced to the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee on February 11, 2013. The Committee then forwarded the project to the Planning Board for their review. Narrative The City is proposing to rezone one parcel (22133 76th Ave. W) from contract General Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and a portion of another parcel (22121 76th Ave. W) from Residential Multifamily (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2) in order to correct two errors on the official zoning map. The subject parcels were inadvertently left out of an area -wide CG2 rezone in 1995 due to a mapping mistake at that time; the proposed rezone will bring the parcels into better alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and the CG2 zoning which has surrounded the parcels since 1995. For background, please refer to Exhibit 2 which is the staff report from the Planning Board's public hearing on March, 27, 2013. The rezone ordinance is attached as Exhibit 3. Attachments Exhibit 1 - Planning Board minutes 3/27/13 Exhibit 2 - Staff report for Planning Board 3/27/13 Exhibit 3: Ordinance Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/02/2013 04:39 PM Packet Page 148 of 266 Mayor Dave Earling 05/03/2013 08:22 AM Finalize for Agenda Linda Hynd 05/03/2013 08:35 AM Form Started By: Michael Clugston Started On: 05/02/2013 09:54 AM Final Approval Date: 05/03/2013 Packet Page 149 of 266 application has been withdrawn, and the applicant has reapplied with a redesigned building that incorporates the guidance provided by the ADB. A new process will start and there will likely be another public hearing before the ADB in May. He emphasized that the project has not been approved. PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPSAL TO REZONE ONE PARCEL (22133 — 76TH AVENUE WEST) FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG2) AND A PORTION OF ANOTHER PARCEL (22121 — 76TH AVENUE WEST) FROM RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY (RM-2.4) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG2) (FILE NUMBER PLN20130008) Chair Reed advised that the purpose of the public hearing is to consider a proposal to rezone one parcel (22133 — 761h Avenue West) from contract General Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and a portion of another parcel (22121 — 76`h Avenue West) from Residential Multifamily (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2) in order to correct two errors on the official zoning map. The subject parcels were inadvertently left out of an area -wide CG2 rezone in 1995 due to a mapping mistake, and the proposed rezone will bring the parcels into better alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and the CG2 zoning that has surrounded the parcels since 1995. Mr. Clugston said the proposal is a City -sponsored rezone of two parcels. He provided an aerial photograph of the vicinity, noting that both parcels are located behind Doug's Mazda, which fronts on Highway 99. The large site (Parcel A) is actually a portion of the Doug's Mazda car dealership. The smaller site (Parcel B) is a portion of the backyard of a single-family residence that was built in 1954. He explained that the current zoning map shows Parcel A as being zoned contract CG2, and it should be contract CG. Parcel B is shown as CG2 and it should be RM-2.4. While the mapping error could be corrected administratively without rezoning the properties, this approach would not address the larger issue that the parcels were clearly left out of a 1995 area -wide rezone due to a mapping error that existed at that time. Mr. Clugston advised that Parcel A was rezoned from RM-2.4 to contract CG in 1988 (see Attachment 5), but Parcel B was not included in that rezone or any another rezone. Therefore, it should have remained RM-2.4. For some reason, the official zoning map was updated incorrectly in the early 1990s. He referred to a 1992 zoning map (Attachment 6), which showed both parcels as CG2 as opposed to CG and RM-2.4. In 1995, the City reviewed and approved an area -wide rezone that was intended to zone all parcels between 220'h and 224`h Streets and 76`' Avenue and Highway 199 as CG2 (see Attachment 7). Unfortunately, due to the mapping error in the early 1990s, Parcels A and B were left out of the 1995 rezone because it was incorrectly assumed that they were already CG2. Mr. Clugston said the purpose of the current rezone proposal is to correct mapping mistakes that were made previously. One option would be to administratively change the map to what it should be (contract CG2 for Parcel A and RM-2.4 for Parcel B). However, staff believes it was the City Council's intent in 1995 that all of the properties between 220`h and 224`h Streets and 76`h Avenue and Highway 99 should be zoned CG2. Staff believes the best approach would be to rezone Parcel A from CG to CG2 and Parcel B from RM-2.4 to CG2. Staff recommends approval of the rezone as proposed in the Staff Report. Board Member Ellis asked if the City has received comments from the owner of the subject property or from surrounding property owners. Mr. Clugston answered no. Board Member Ellis asked if the two properties are owned by the same person. Mr. Clugston answered that both parcels are owned by Doug Ikegami. He said staff has advised Mr. Ikegami of the rezone proposal and he indicated his support. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. AS NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE INDICATED A DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD, THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Board Member Lovell recalled that at their February 27`h study session, the Board discussed that the rezone proposal is straight forward. BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT, ANALYSIS AND ATTACHMENTS IN THE STAFF REPORT, BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FOREWARD FILE NUMBER PLN20130008 TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATON OF APPROVAL AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. VICE CHAIR STEWART SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 2 Packet Page 150 of 266 121- STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 PLANNING DIVISION ADVISORY REPORT FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION To: Edmonds Planning Board From: Michael Clugston, AICP Associate Planner Date: March 19, 2013 File: PLN20130008 Hearing Date, Time, and Place: March 27 2013 at 7:00 PM Edmonds City Council Chambers Public Safety Complex 250 - 5th Avenue North A. APPLICATION 1. Applicant: City of Edmonds 2. Site location: 22133 and 22121 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, WA (Tax Parcel #s: 27042900305900 and 27042900305300) 3. Request: The City is proposing to rezone one parcel (22133 76th) from contract General Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and a portion of another parcel (22121 76th) from Residential Multifamily (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2) in order to correct two errors on the official zoning map. The subject parcels were inadvertently left out of an area -wide CG2 rezone in 1995 due to a mapping mistake at that time; the proposed rezone will bring the parcels into better alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and the CG2 zoning which has surrounded the parcels since 1995. 4. Review process: - a. Rezone (Type IV-B permit) — Planning Board conducts a public hearing and forwards a recommendation to the City Council for closed -record review and a final decision. 5. Compliance required with: a. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.01 (Types of City of Edmonds cat Planning Board Packet Page 151 of 266 Development Project Permits) b. ECDC Chapter 20.15A (Environmental Review - SEPA) c. ECDC Chapter 20.40 (Rezones) II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND ANALYSIS A. SITE DESCRIPTION 1. Site Development and Zoning a. Facts i. Size: According to the County Assessor, 22133 76t" Ave. W (Parcel A) is 42,014 square feet. The portion of 22121 76t" Ave. W (Parcel B) that is to be rezoned is approximately 3,720 square feet. Zoning: The current zoning map dated December 2012 shows Parcel A as contract CG2 and Parcel B as CG2 (Attachment 1). These designations are incorrect and will be updated administratively as shown on Attachment 2 should the Planning Board and Council not approve the subject rezone request to amend the official zoning map. Parcel A should be contract CG and Parcel should be RM-2.4. iii. Land Use: Parcel A is the site of a portion of the Doug's Mazda car dealership. Parcel B is a portion of the back yard of a single family residence built in 1954 (Attachment 3). Both parcels are owned by Douglas Ikegami. 2. Neighboring Development and Zoning a. Facts North: The parcels to the north are zoned General Commercial (CG2) but are developed with a variety of uses including single- and multifamily residential and office. East: The parcels to the east are zoned General Commercial (CG2) and are developed with car dealerships facing Highway 99. iii. South: The parcels to the south are zoned General Commercial (CG2) but are developed with multifamily residential buildings. iv. West: Immediately to the west, the parcels are zoned General Commercial (CG2) and developed with a portion of the Doug's Mazda dealership and a single family residence. Across 76t" Avenue to the west is unincorporated Snohomish County where parcels are zoned Multiple Residential (MR) and developed with primarily with single family residences and a few multifamily structures. Packet Page 152 of 266 B. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) 1. Fact: A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on March 13, 2013 (Attachment 4). No comments or appeals were received. Because this is a non - project action, further environmental review may be required with subsequent requests for specific project approvals. C. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE 1. ECDC Section 20.40 (Rezones) a. Facts i. As mentioned previously, there are two errors on the December 2012 zoning map. That map shows Parcel A as being zoned contract CG2 (should be contract CG) while Parcel B is shown as CG2 (should be RM-2.4). This mapping error will be corrected administratively if the Planning Board and Council do not approve the subject rezone. However, that would not address the larger issue which is that these parcels were clearly left out of a 1995 area -wide rezone due to a mapping error that existed at that time. ii. Parcel A was rezoned from RM-2.4 to contract CG in 1988 (Attachment 5). Parcel B was not rezoned as part of R-1-88 (nor during any other rezone) and so should have remained RM-2.4 as seen in Attachment 5. Parcel A is part of the Doug's Mazda site and the 1988 contract rezone preceded an application to construct a building related to the car dealership which would not have otherwise been allowed in the RM-2.4 zone. iii. For some reason, the official zoning map was updated incorrectly in the early 1990s —Attachment 6 is an excerpt of the 1992 zoning map. Both Parcel A and Parcel B are shown as CG2 as opposed to contract CG and RM-2.4, respectively. iv. In 1995, the City of Edmonds reviewed and approved an area -wide rezone which was intended to make all of the parcels between 220th and 224th Streets and 76th Avenue and Highway 99 zoned CG2 (Attachment 7). Unfortunately, due to the mapping error in the early 1990s, subject Parcels A and B were left out of the 1995 project because it was incorrectly assumed at that time that they were already CG2. v. Requests to amend the official zoning map require compliance with ECDC 20.40 which includes SEPA review and public notice. b. Analysis Although this project is simply intended to correct a mapping error, the following is an analysis of the proposed rezone against the six decision criteria as required in ECDC 20.40.010. L Whether the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Packet Page 153 of 266 The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The subject parcels, as well as the surrounding parcels in the area from 220th to 224th and 76th Avenue to Highway 99, are designated as Highway 99 Corridor within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. ii. Whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance, and whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the proposed zone district. The proposed rezone is consistent with the zoning ordinance and CG2 zone district. As noted above, all the parcels surrounding the subject parcels are zoned CG2 and have been since 1995. iii. The relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property. The area surrounding the subject parcels has been zoned CG2 since 1995 and has been slowly redeveloping accordingly during that time. iv. Whether there has been sufficient change in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or in city policy to justify the rezone. In 1995, the City Council determined that there had been sufficient change in the area to approve the area -wide rezone identified as R-95-143 (Attachment 7). This project brings the two subject parcels into agreement with the intent of that rezone. v. Whether the property is economically and physically suitable for the uses allowed under the existing zoning, and under the proposed zoning. One factor could be the length of time the property has remained undeveloped compared to the surrounding area, and parcels elsewhere with the same zoning. As with the immediately surrounding parcels, the two subject parcels are economically and physically suitable for the uses allowed under the CG2 zone. vi. The relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare compared to the potential increase or decrease in value to the property owners. The public will gain by correcting this mapping error since any confusion about allowed uses and applicable development standards will have been resolved when future redevelopment of the subject parcels is proposed. D. PUBLIC COMMENTS To date, no public comments have been received regarding the subject application. 4 Packet Page 154 of 266 III. RECOMMENDATION Based on the Findings of Fact, Analysis and Attachments in this report, staff proposes that the Planning Board make a recommendation to the City Council to approve this request to rezone 22133 76th Ave. W from contract General Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and a portion of 22121 76th Ave. W from Residential Multifamily (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2). IV. ATTACHMENTS 1. Zoning map (December 2012) 2. Updated zoning map (pending April 2013, if subject rezone is not approved) 3. Aerial photo of vicinity 4. Determination of Nonsignificance, issued March 13, 2013 5. R-1-88 contract rezone map 6. 1992 official Edmonds zoning map excerpt 7. R-95-143 area -wide rezone map 8. Public notice documentation V. PARTIES OF RECORD Douglas Ikegami 11115 Kulshan Rd. Woodway, WA 98020 5 Packet Page 155 of 266 �y OF GDAfO'� ' ° Area of Proposed Rezone 22133 & 22121 76th Ave. W PLN20130008 Zoning Map (December 2012 ) 1 inch = 250 feet T Attachment 1 PLN20130008 Packet Page 156 of 266 �y OF E04f(0 Area of Proposed Rezone 22133 & 22121 76th Ave. W PLN20130008 Updated Zoning Map (April 2013, pending) 1 inch = 250 feet T Attachment 2 PLN20130008 Packet Page 157 of 266 U y OF Ev'Oy� ° Area of Proposed Rezone Aerial Photo 22133 & 22121 76th Ave. W PLN20130008 1 inch = 250 feet Attachment 3 am► Wel 911 Packet Page 158 of 266 l OF ED V O v w CITY OF EDMONDS Fsr JS90 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 WAC 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) Description of proposal: The City of Edmonds is proposing to rezone one parcel (22133 76th) from contract General Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and a portion of another parcel (22121 76th) from Residential Multifamily (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2) in order to correct an error on the zoning map. The subject parcels were inadvertently left out of an area -wide CG2 rezone in 1995 due to a mapping mistake at that time; the proposed rezone will bring the parcels into better alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and the CG2 zoning which has surrounded the parcels since 1995. Proponent: City of Edmonds Location of proposal, including street address if any: 22133 and 22121 76th Avenue West Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. XX There is no comment period for this DNS. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by Project Planner: Mike Clugston, Associate Planner Responsible Official: Rob Chave, Development Services Director, Contact Information: City of Edmonds 1 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 (425-771-0220 f4 Date: March 13 2013 Signature: d/ 1V� a,e A C XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Development Services Director, at 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for the appeal with the required appeal fee, adjacent property owners list and notarized affidavit form no later than March 27, 2013. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Rob Chave to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on March 13, 2013, at the Edmonds Public Library and Edmonds Public Safety Building. Published in the Everett Herald. Emailed to the Department of Ecology SEPA Center (SEPAunit(cDecy.wa.gov). Mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site. XX Distributed notice to "Checked" Agencies below The SEPA Checklist, project plans, location map, and DNS are available at www.edmondswa.p Permits Online link. Search for file number PLN20130008. These materials are also available fc Planning Division which is located on the second floor of City Hall: 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds W Attachment 4 PLN20130008 Page 1 of 2 SEPA DNS PLN20130008.DOCX 3/7/13.SEPA Packet Page 159 of 266 XX Environmental Review Section Department of Ecology P.O. Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Email: SEPAunit(a)ecy.wa.gov XX COMCAST Outside rlant Engineer, North Region 1525 751 St SW Ste 200 Everett, WA 98203 XX Edmonds School District No. 15 Attn.: Planning and Property Manager 20420 68th Avenue West Lynnwood, WA 98036-7400 XX Community Transit Attn.: Brent Russell 7100 Hardeson Road Everett, WA 98203 XX Washington State Dept. of Transportation Attn: Ramin Pazooki SnoKing Developer Services, MS 221 15700 Dayton Ave. N. PO Box 330310 XX Seattle, WA 98133-9710 XX Puget Sound Regional Council Attn.: S.R.C. 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98104-1035 XX Snohomish County Planning & Development Services 3000 Rockefeller Everett, WA 98201 XX Snohomish County Public Works Attn.: Environmental Coordinator 3000 Rockefeller M/S 607 Everett, WA 98201 XX Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 Attn.: Director of Fire Services 12310 Meridian Avenue South Everett, WA 98208-5728 Attachments c: SEPA Notebook Dean Saksena, Senior Manager Snohomish Co. PUD PO Box 1107 Everett,.WA 98206-1107 Donna J. Bunten Department of Ecology Shorelands & Environ. Assist. Program PO Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 XX Kristin Kelly Snoh. Co/Skagit Co. Program Director, Futurewise Smart Growth Dir., Pilchuck Audubon Society 1429 Avenue D., PMB 532 Snohomish, WA 98290 Email: Kristin@futurewise.org XX Swedish Hospital 21601 76th Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Page 2 of 2 SEPA DNS PLN20130008.DOCX P aRefMage 160 of 266 o'V ED,V '-OF EDMONDS St. 1 Purpose of Checklist. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Rezone to correct map for parcels at 22133 & 22121 76" Avenue West 2. Name of applicant: City of Edmonds 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Mike Clugston, AICP, Associate Planner — 425.771.0220 City of Edmonds Development Services Department —121 5'h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 4. Date checklist prepared: March 6, 2013 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Planning Board hearing and City Council hearing — Spring 2013 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None known 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Pending rezone, file # PLN20130008 Page 1 of 10 environmental checklist W0130008.doc:3.7.2013 Packet Page 161 of 266 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The City of Edmonds is proposing to rezone one parcel (22133 76th) from contract General Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and a portion of another parcel (22121 76th) from Residential Multifamily (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2) in order to correct an error on the zoning map. The subject parcels were inadvertently left out of an area -wide CG2 rezone in 1995 due to a mapping mistake at that time; the proposed rezone will bring the parcels into better alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and the CG2 zoning which has surrounded the parcels since 1995. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Section 29, Township 27 North, Range 04 East,— see map, attached 22133 76`h Avenue West (Tax ID: 270429003005900) and the eastern extent of 22121 76`h Avenue West (Tax ID: 27042900305300. e S. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, , oth b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Less than 5% slope from 76`4 Avenue West to Highway 99 C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Alderwood Urban Land Complex, 2-8% slopes d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None known C. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No grading proposed with rezone application f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Not applicable — no grading proposed g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not applicable — no change to impervious surface proposed h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Page 2 of 10 environmental checklist In20130008.doc: 3.7.2013 Packef Page 162 of 266 None — no changes proposed 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. None — no changes proposed b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No — none known C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any: None — not applicable 3. WATER a. Surface: (1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No (2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No (3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None (4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No (6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No b. Ground: (1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No (2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; I�1 � Page 3 of 10 envronmentalAac etPPage 163 of 26613 etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None — not applicable C. Water Runoff (including storm water): (1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. None — not applicable (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No changes proposed d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: . None — no changes are proposed 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: Typical bf a developed commercial area ✓ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: ✓ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other: ✓ shrubs ✓ grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup,, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other: water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other: other types of vegetation: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None proposed C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: No landscaping proposed — no changes to site proposed 5. Animals a. Check or circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Typical of a developed commercial area ✓ birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: Page 4 of 10 environmental checklist pIn201300 8.doc: 3 7.2013 Packet Page �64 of 266 b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. None known d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None — no changes proposed 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. No changes proposed b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. No (1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None (2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None b. Noise (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Typical noise from commercial development and traffic on 76`1' Avenue West (2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. None — no changes proposed (3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None 8. Land and Shoreline Use Page 5 of 10 environmental checklist p1 0"00q$_' : 3.A' F ackef Wage 1 bbb oTT LL bbbb a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? 22133 76`h is the site of a structure related to the Doug's Mazda car dealership which fronts Highway 99. 22121 76`h contains a single family residence. To the north and south are mixes of multi family and commercial uses. To the west across 76'h Avenue West is an area of single family development administered by Snohomish County. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No C. Describe any structures on the site. 22133 761h is the site of a structure related to the Doug's Mazda car dealership which fronts Highway 99. 22121 76'h contains a single family residence. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning map shows contract General Commercial (CG2) on 22133 76`h and CG2 for the entirety of 22121 76`h but it should actually show contract General Commercial (CG) on 22133 761h and Multiple Residential (RM-2.4) on the eastern extent of 22121 76`'. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Mixed corridor development within the Highway 99 Corridor and the Medical/Highway Activity Center overlays g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site? None h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? No changes j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None — no changes k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None — not applicable 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: This rezone is intended to correct an existing error on the zoning map. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No change b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. P Page 6 of 10 environmental 9ak] e' `Pag °e°l bbp$� 0 �e6' No change C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principle exterior building material(s) proposed? No structures proposed b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? No development is proposed b. , Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No changes proposed d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None proposed 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Esperance Park is within '/ mile of the project site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so, describe. No C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None — Not applicable 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Page 7 of 10 environmental Pac�ePVage00ib°P 01-�6V 3 None C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Should archaeological materials or human remains be observed during project activities, all work in immediate vicinity should stop. The State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (360.586.3065), the Planning Division (425.771.0220), and the County Coroner (if applicable) should be contacted immediately. Compliance with all applicable laws (RCW 27.53, 27.44, & WAC 25-48) is required -failure to do so could constitute a Class C Felony. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site is served by 76`h Avenue West to the west and Highway 99 to the east. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Transit stops are located on Highway 99 and near the intersection of 76`h Avenue West and 220`h Street SW C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? No change d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peals volumes would occur. No change g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None — not applicable 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No — no change b. Proposed measures to reduce or Control direct impacts on public services, if any: None 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septie system�r: o 3 zZNVp.� Page 8 of 10 envunm oental�sj'�cC'9fMog"doo 2pg,�5 6 ' b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. No new utilities are proposed with the rezone. The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature of Proponent Date Submitted 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? It will not — there is no new development proposed. Proposal measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Page 9 of 10 environmental9ff98f�''"9g00iMro NW3 N/A 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? It will not — there is no new development proposed. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: N/A 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? It will not — there is no new development proposed.. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: N/A 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? It will not — there is no new development proposed. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: N/A S. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The proposal will correct the zoning map and make it consistent and compatible with the long range Comprehensive Plan map. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Enforcement of the Edmonds Community Development Code. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? It will not — there is no new development proposed. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: N/A 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. No conflicts are known. �1�1'� pu� QQg� 3 z Page 10 of 10 environmental�aCKSfVao"000"I/U —HW r 9 SW1/4 SEC..29, TWP. 27 N., RGE..4 E.,. W.M. • //4 sec. -co. ...... � � / L D-045 3-0441I I l 7 . 3-047 1�IWjQ Q4 I I \> --- X— L / 3-050 JZ Z� 3-039 1 "i-037 3-019 / Parcel B I 0) I 305� 2W L3 . i• I 0) � O I I' A. 221St, ST S,W. V LIMITS, OF � �.'J v �- 28 3-01B — OWNERSN IE I .- A 3-052 4 3-023 _ _ 3,0 3--057 cs1':�fl%a. ZZZiiC± $. 3-058 3-024 -N . _. ............ . - 3-0ca0 �a4i i 3 xo i 0 Parcel A III 3-062 3-ob! �' i 3-020 PARK I(� M o WESTWOOD — — — li (O CO!lOD) AREA; TO; BE; REZONED, E TO; (68/8) _ GENERAL,'COMMERCIAL, P 0) ~ (?THIS, APPLICATION - (GO PARK ' 3-067 I ,no I m I I MI['t, !I� (6129) 3-068 309! fond j C 3-o69./N q) I I �� I :�, u 3-071 224th. ST.- S. W. 225th.ST. �' 4 W_ aJ 5 �1 � 6 — 3 to M 7 4 8 7 10 B 9 Attachment 5 PLN20130008 VICINI' GROUP FOUR, Inc. . Wrq /DOUG"S LYNNWOOD MAZDA 970J JQN As.ww ' Ihl ta,, .Wd yv oaw^ a-, aoensasei REZONE Packet Page 171 of 266 1 - -----i - - -- - - — Q 18TH ST. I AL .84' -- - - a f" PINE(_AN0 (Lt 4RA(�i E'4 + a ( F. h 9 219 P l s _ 6 e o ADD NILI,FRS ADO 4 s 6 N y 10 I 4 220T 2 2 0 TH J i 2681 +' Parcel B sr s.w CG I w x ST. SW. q ) I e ! 4 5 f, — � i A f Parcel A i, M R M 2.4 22 ui 25 2 f 7 , :j RS— 8" I a .o L.S C J �0 a 9 e q B Y Attachment 6 - ---- PLN20130008 Packet Page 172 of 266 00 O r M �O Z U 0 w m Z Q z ® < 1L t.. Notice of Public Hearing znd SEPA Determination PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Edmonds is proposing to rezone one parcel (22133 76th) from contract Gen- eral Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and a portion of another parcel (22121 76th) from Residential Multifam- ily (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2) in order to correct an error on the zoning map. The subject parcels were inadver- tently left out of an area -wide CG2 rezone in 1995 due to a mapping mistake at that time; the proposed rezone will bring the parcels into better alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and the CG2 zoning which has surrounded the parcels since 1995. NAME OF APPLICANT: City of Edmonds PROJECT LOCATION: 22133 and 22121 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, WA Tax Parcel IDs: 27042900305900 and 27042900305300 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: March 27, 2013 Any person has the right to comment on this application during the public comment period, receive notice and participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the application. The City may accept public comments at any time prior to the closing of the record of an open record predecision hearing, if any, or, if no open record predecision hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project permit. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.07.003 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. Information on this development application can be viewed or obtained at the City of Edmonds Planning Division between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday or online at the city's website at www.edmondswa.gov through the Permit Assistance link. Search for permit PLN20130008. SEPA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE SEPA DETERMINATION: Notice is hereby given that the City of Edmonds has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance under WAC 197-11-340(2) for the above project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: See above. DATE OF ISSUANCE: March 13, 2013 SEPA COMMENTS DUE: March 27, 2013 SEPA APPEAL: This SEPA determination may be appealed by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for appeal with the required appeal fee no later than 4 p.m. on March 27, 2013. City of Edmonds Development Services Department Planning Division 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Project Planner: Mice Clugston, AICP clugston@edmondswa.gov 425.771.0220 www.edmondswa.gov Attachment 8 PLN20130008 Packet Page 174 of 266 �� OF ED�Io` t i Zonn 22133 and 22121 76th Ave. VV g and Vicin ty Map PLN20130008 1 inch = 250 feet Packet Page 175 of 266 )8 fLj 21817 21815 7516 ti X:21816 I 2181 2181 (� n `a� 21822 LLI 21827 12�21820 21823 1828-, 121822 219TH ST SW 7623 21906 21911. 7621 w 2 N 7523]--- 220TH ST SW 2200 a77107708 N 22006 22005 7512 22012 ��`b ?2 7706 g `L`ti h oj9 22018 22009 7704 22020 2202$ 2?029 7702 22028 22024 22015 a� o 22104 22021 o°j' 22110 `322106 . �,� 221ST PL SW z MRG"' b N ? w. 22118 =124 fill r ?yrs LO a 2?rr: ^ ~ )7 = r �22121 N co o ND ST SW M CM cc 22206 E N N 22212 `� o 0 N w N oo 22211 o CM N ►� ti ti h ti 22218 to CD r` r ti N N N 22215 22Z1J "`""_; 22224 � 22217 22221 _ o �_`�", 7719 o N N 22304 �"ho22307 r c4 ti 22311 Of 3RD W N 00 o W 0 0�, O M N r o �22313 ti m 0 cg 0 N as a) N 22319 � A ti n ti ti ti N 22325 NN: ST SW > N ® N m m eo cs N h n ti N 22400 uj 22419 22418 < 22419 22424 22425 22420 = moo® 2, 22431 22424 n 22431 22430 a - OF EDA, C`� 300' Mailing List 22133 & 22121 76th Ave. W i PLN20130008 111 22020 ®®® C Cv Dick's 21910 ??079 r 22111 22127 22130 7305 CD m � O 22214%� 22201 o 0 22315 M N ~ N r r 22325� 72C 224TH S' CO Cm M 22405 22406 MN ~ ~ 22415 22414 � N 22421 22420 ti ,nrTu �T 22427 2249R� 1 inch = 250 feet Packet Page 176 of 266 use Hverq— iemNiaLc J Iw 00461000301901 ABERNATHY KEITH G & BENTLEY ELIZABETH B 7625 222ND ST SW EDMONDS, WA 98026-7966 00745400100200 BENNETT NANCY D 22110 76TH AVE W UNIT B EDMONDS, WA 98026-7906 27043000400300 BRUNSELL FAMILY REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 715 CHURCH AVE MUKILTEO, WA 98275 00681800100200 CULLUM JOHN & CARRIE 22215 76TH AVE W #A-2 EDMONDS, WA 98026 00461000301901 BAILEY MARTI & ROBERT 4939 NE AVALON LANE BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA 98110 27042900306800 BOKA ASSOCIATES 22319 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026-7911 00501100000900 BUTER LESLIE A PO BOX 1886 EDMONDS, WA 98020 00681800200400 DEISHER DAVID JAMES TRUST 6123 130TH PL SE SNOHOMISH, WA 98296-4253 00501100001200 00681800400300 DOMINIC & MARJIE D'ANGELO FIVE FILIPIAK SHANE M LLC 22221 76TH AVE W # D3 7018 150TH PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98026 EDMONDS, WA 98026-4620 00461000300202 GARCIA GINO. S & ARCADIA M 22020 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026-7904 00681800300300 HANSON MIEKO S PO BOX 25265 SEATTLE, WA 98125 27042900306400 IKEGAMI PROPERTIES LLC 11-115 KULSHAN RD WOODWAY, WA 98020 '00681800100100 KIRSCH CARLA 22215 76TH AVE W UNIT A-1 EDMONDS, WA 98026 27042900303700 LYNNWOOD HONDA NELSON MOTORS INC EDMONDS, WA 98020 27042900304200 HALL L R PO BOX 82487 KENMORE, WA 98028 00681800200100 HO KAM WING 22217 76TH AVE W UNIT B-1 EDMONDS, WA 98026-7920 27042900309500 JHANSON INVESTMENTS LLC 7522 221ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98026 06461000300106 KIVLEN EDWARD 22018 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026-7904 006.81800400400 MASSOUD MEDHAT R & YOUSSEF TOMADER T 22221 76TH AVE W UNIT D-4 EDMONDS, WA 98026-1922 00744400100200 BANNISTER CHRISTINE A 22118 76TH AVE W UNIT B EDMONDS, WA 98026-7906 00681800300400 BOYLE BARBARA 22219 76TH AVE W C-4 EDMONDS, WA 98020 27042900305100 CAMPBELL CHARLES IRWIN 22021 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98020 00501100000800 DELMORE LOUISE Y 7622 222ND ST SW EDMONDS, WA 98026-7966 00744600100200 FRIEND DWIGHT 12819 SE 38TH ST #37 BELLEVUE, WA 98006 00681800100400 HANSON MIEKO P O BOX 25265 SEATTLE, WA 98125 27042900305700 IKEGAMI F DOUGLAS 22130 HWY 99 EDMONDS, WA 98026 00501100001100 JIANG XUE FEI & HUANG HONMING 22218 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026-7908 00681800400200 LY NGHIA V 22221 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026 27042900309200 MCGREW DWIGHT R & KATIE K 7907 212TH ST SW, UNIT 102 EDMONDS, WA 98026 Repositionable i Repliez a la hachure afin de www.avery.com i ® ® � Sens de reveler le rebord Pop-UpTM i 1-800-GO-AVERY � Ut►lisez le gjal4&rjj RIlFj7 �P charoement use Avery iempiaLe :3 iou- 00461000302000 MILES GORDON T 7607 222ND ST SW EDMONDS, WA 98026 00681800300200 OSORIO WILFRED 22219 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026 00501100000700 PHILLIPS ARTHUR W & DONNA N 7628 222ND S W EDMONDS, WA 98026 27042900306700 SNOW AUTUMN 134 3RD AVE N EDMONDS, WA 98020-3108 00744600100100 TEBOW JOHN D 22124 76TH WEST UNIT A EDMONDS, WA 98026 00681800400100 WILCOX ROD 22221 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026 27042900306500 YERIEL LLC PO BOX 84325 SEATTLE, WA 98124 00461000301902 MOE SEAN T & JOZANNE W 7615 222ND ST SW EDMONDS, WA 98026-7966 00744400100100 PAIGE KENNETH & MARYANN 22118 76TH AVE W UNIT A EDMONDS, WA 98026-7906 00461000300201 PINTER KAREN L 22028 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026 00593900000100 SNYDER JEFFREY S 7519 221 ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98026-8029 00681800200200 TSANG MAN YING 22217 76TH AVE W UNIT B-2 EDMONDS, WA 98026-7920 00681800200300 WU ROBERTA W & WOO PATRICK 15719 37TH AVE NE LAKE FQREST PARK, WA 98155 00681800300100 ZHOU WEI QING & JIN XIAO BO 22219 76TH AVE W UNIT C-1 EDMONDS, WA 98026 00780700000200 MOORE MICHAEL C & SANDRA L 22106 76TH AVE W UNIT B EDMONDS, WA 98026-7906 00681800100300 PENG MIAO LING 22215 76TH AVE W UNIT A-3 EDMONDS, WA 98026-7919 00593900000400 SCHMIDT ALFRED 19817 WALLINGFORD AVENUE NORTH SHORELINE, WA 98133 27042900305000 STRAND MICHAEL J 20111 RICHMOND BCH DR NW SHORELINE, WA 98177 27042900304300 WHITNEY BETHLYN J PO BOX 1323 EDMONDS, WA 98020 27042900302700 YAMAMURA TED 15448 SE 47TH PL BELLEVUE; WA. 9,8005 Repositionable A Repliez a la hachure afin de www.avery.com Utilisez le gaa�Cett�ag R`�78 of�66 chaegement nsde reveler le rebord pop-UpTM 1-800-GO-AVERY On the 12th day of March, 2013, the attached Notice of Application and SEPA Determination was mailed as prescribed by Ordinance. I, Michael D. Clugston, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 12th day of March, 2013, at Edmonds, Washington. Signed: Packet Page 179 of 266 On the 12th day of March, 2013, the attached Notice of Application and SEPA Determination was posted as prescribed by Ordinance and in any event where applicable on or near the subject property. I, Michael D. Clugston, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 12th day of March, 2013, at Edmonds, Washington. Signed: Packet Page 180 of 266 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH } S.S. Account Name: City of Edmonds The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper printed and published in the City of Everett, County of Snohomish, and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County and that the notice Public Hearing and SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance PLN20130008 a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said newspaper proper and not in supplement form, in the regular and entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely: March 13, 2013 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of _ March, 2013 Notary Public in and for the State of Wash County. Account Number: 101416 13th siding at Everett, jSnohoishPUPLi 2-17-20 -71 Or um er. 0001813085 Packet Page 181 of 266 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVING A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR TWO PARCELS LOCATED AT 22133 76TH AVENUE WEST FROM CONTRACT GENERAL COMMERICAL (CG) TO GENERAL COMMERICAL (CG2) AND A PORTION OF 22121 76TH AVENUE WEST FROM MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL (RM-2.4) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG2); AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF THE CITY' S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendation of the Planning Board, which after an open -record public hearing on March 27, 2013, is recommending approval of a rezone of two parcels comprising 45,550 square feet, more or less, located at 22133 76t' Avenue West from contract General Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and a portion of 22121 76TH Avenue West from Multiple Residential (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2); and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the minutes of the hearing before the Planning Board, which were attached to the council agenda memo as Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Planning Division Advisory Report, Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations dated March 19, 2013, which was attached to the council agenda memo as Exhibit 2; and WHEREAS, a closed -record hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation was held by the City Council on May 7, 2013; and -1- Packet Page 182 of 266 WHEREAS, this rezone will correct errors on the current zoning map and bring the subject parcels into better agreement with the surrounding parcels which were part of a City - sponsored area -wide rezone in 1995 (PLN19950143); and WHEREAS, the properties at 22133 and 22121 76th Avenue West are depicted in a zoning map dated December 2012, and included as Attachment 1 to the Planning Division Advisory Report, Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations dated March 19, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council agrees with the Planning Board's analysis that the proposed rezone is in the public interest and satisfies all applicable criteria of the Edmonds Community Development Code; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. For its findings and conclusions in support of the rezone effected by this ordinance, the City Council hereby adopts by reference the findings and conclusions contained in the Planning Division Advisory Report, Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations dated March 19, 2013 (File No. PLN20130008). Section 2. The two parcels located at 22133 761h Avenue W and the RM-2.4- zoned portion of 22121 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, Washington and shown on the attached zoning map dated December 2012 (Exhibit A) are hereby rezoned from contract General Commercial (CG) to General Commercial (CG2) and Multiple Residential (RM-2.4) to General Commercial (CG2), respectively. Exhibit A attached hereto is hereby incorporated by this reference as if herein set forth in full. Section 3. The Development Services Director or his designee is hereby authorized and directed to make appropriate amendments to the Edmonds Zoning Map in order -2- Packet Page 183 of 266 to properly designate the rezoned property as General Commercial (CG2) pursuant to Section 2 of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVID O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. -3- Packet Page 184 of 266 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2013, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVING A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR TWO PARCELS LOCATED AT 22133 76TH AVENUE WEST FROM CONTRACT GENERAL COMMERICAL (CG) TO GENERAL COMMERICAL (CG2) AND A PORTION OF 22121 76TH AVENUE WEST FROM MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL (RM-2.4) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG2); AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF THE CITY'S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2013. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 185 of 266 Exhibit A See attached zoning map -5- Packet Page 186 of 266 Unincorporated `�,�ol Snohomish County W a x 1•I — o ,.a�ed� L II cx� C �IL�J CS�`t'S �FJ MEMO— EDP � O 22133 and 22121 76th Ave. W - PLN20130008 Inc. 1890 Zoning and Vicinty Map 1 inch = 250 feet Packet Page 187 of 266 AM-5718 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: Submitted By: Department: 20 Minutes Jen Machuga Planning Review Committee: Parks/Planning/Public Works Type: Action Information 12. Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council Subject Title Public Hearing: Proposed code amendment to increase the time frame for validity of preliminary short plat approval as established in ECDC 20.75.100 (File No. AMD20130002). Recommendation Staff recommends that following the close of the public hearing, the City Council approve the code changes as indicated in Attachment 1 and direct staff to bring it back as an ordinance on the consent agenda. Previous Council Action This item was discussed by the Parks, Planning & Public Works Council Committee on February 11, 2013, and the Committee felt it would be appropriate to increase the current five year time frame and/or add provisions for an extension to the current time frame. The Committee forwarded this item to the Planning Board for discussion and a public hearing before moving forward with full Council review. This item was discussed with the Council on April 23, 2013, and the Council agreed to move forward with a public hearing. Narrative Under state law, cities have significant discretion in establishing their own procedures to govern short plats (subdivision of land into four lots or less). RCW 58.17.060 states the following: "The legislative body of a city, town, or county shall adopt regulations and procedures, and appoint administrative personnel for the summary approval of short plats and short subdivisions or alteration or vacation thereof. ...Such regulations shall be adopted by ordinance and shall provide that a short plat and short subdivision may be approved only if written findings that are appropriate, as provided in RCW 58.17.110, are made by the administrative personnel, and may contain wholly different requirements than those governing the approval of preliminary and final plats of subdivisions..." State law also leaves it to cities to determine the time within which a short plat must be recorded before it expires. For formal subdivisions (subdivision of land into five or more lots), current state law establishes a seven year time frame for final approval if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and a five year time frame for final approval if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015 (RCW 58.17.140(3)). State law was recently revised and provides even longer for certain formal plats approved before December 31, 2007. These time frames; however, do not apply to short plats. Because state law Packet Page 188 of 266 does not contain any such deadline for short plats, it is up to each city to determine how long a developer should have to finish a short plat. Currently, Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.75.100 causes preliminary approval of short plats to expire after five years. However, the city could revise the code to make this time frame shorter or longer. At the January 22, 2013 City Council meeting, concerns were raised by a citizen that the current five year validity of preliminary short plat approval is not long enough -- given the recent recession -- and that the city should revise its code requirements to allow seven years for preliminary short plat approvals to be consistent with the change in state law related to formal plats. This item was discussed by the Parks, Planning & Public Works Council Committee on February 11, 2013, and the Committee felt it would be appropriate to increase the current five year time frame and/or add provisions for an extension to the current time frame. The Committee forwarded this item to the Planning Board for discussion and a public hearing. The Planning Board discussed this item on February 27, 2013 and conducted a public hearing on March 27, 2013. Minutes from both meetings are attached. Following the close of the public hearing, the Planning Board voted to forward this item to the Council with a recommendation of approval. The City Council discussed this item on April 23, 2013 and agreed to move forward with a public hearing. Refer to Attachment 1 for the draft revised code language of which the Planning Board recommended approval. The proposed code language includes provisions for both formal plats and short plats in order to clearly indicate which timing regulations apply to which subdivision type. Regarding formal plats, the proposed code language specifically references the State regulations for the time frame for preliminary plat validity. Also, the proposed code language includes a correction to the decision -making body for preliminary formal plat approval (corrected from the City Council to the Hearing Examiner) and the decision -making body for potential appeals. Regarding short plats, the proposed code language causes preliminary short plat approval to expire at the end of seven years if the preliminary short plat approval is issued on or before December 31, 2013 and at the end of five years if the preliminary short plat approval is issued on or after January 1, 2014. This mirrors the State provisions for formal plats; however, the draft code language causes the time frame to switch back to five years one year sooner than what the State regulations afford to formal plats. The sunset date of December 31, 2013 has been proposed, in part, to address stormwater code changes that the City will be required to implement by 2015 in order to meet Department of Ecology's new permit requirements. This proposed sunset date will minimize the number of applications vested to older stormwater codes, while still recognizing that one of the main purposes for the proposed amendment is to help with those applications that were put on hold due to the economic downturn. To further meet the goal of this code revision, the proposed language also includes a provision for extending the time limit for preliminary short plats that would have expired within the past couple of years, thereby giving them two additional years from the effective date of the ordinance to obtain final approval. Attachments: 1. Draft code language 2. Sampling of time frames established for short plat approvals by other local jurisdictions 3. Chart displaying statistics of recent Edmonds short plats 4. State law for formal plats (RCW 58.17.140) 5. City Council discussion minutes (draft) - April 23, 2013 6. Planning Board public hearing minutes - March 27, 2013 7. Planning Board discussion minutes - February 27, 2013 Packet Page 189 of 266 8. Parks, Planning, & Public Works Committee discussion minutes - February 11, 2013 Attachments Attachment 1: Draft code language Attachment 2: Sampling of time frames established for short plat approvals by other local jurisdictions Attachment 3: Chart displaying statistics of recent Edmonds short plats Attachment 4: State law for formal plats (RCW 58.17.140) Attachment 5: City Council discussion minutes (draft) - 4/23/13 Attachment 6: Planning Board public hearing minutes - 3/27/13 Attachment 7: Planning Board discussion minutes - 2/27/13 Attachment 8: Parks, Planning, & Public Works Committee discussion minutes - 2/11/13 Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Linda Hynd Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Linda Hynd Form Started By: Jen Machuga Final Approval Date: 05/02/2013 Form Review Date 05/02/2013 11:48 AM 05/02/2013 01:59 PM 05/02/2013 02:11 PM Started On: 05/01/2013 04:39 PM Packet Page 190 of 266 CURRENT CODE 20.75.100 Preliminary approval — Time limit. Approval of a preliminary plat or preliminary short plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of five years, unless the applicant has acquired final plat or final short plat approval within the five-year period. The five-year period for subdivisions shall commence upon the date of preliminary plat approval by the adoption of a written decision by the Edmonds city council. The five-year period for preliminary plats of short subdivisions shall commence upon the issuance of a final, written staff decision. In the event that either the decision of the city council or the staff is appealed to the Snohomish County superior court, the five-year period shall commence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary plat or preliminary short plat decision by the judiciary. [Ord. 3230 § 1, 1998; Ord. 3211 § 8, 1998; Ord. 3190 § 1, 1998; Ord. 2379 § 3, 1983]. PROPOSED REVISION 20.75.100 Preliminary approval — Time limit. A. Approval of a preliminary plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of the time period established under RCW 58.17.140, unless the applicant has acquired final plat approval prior to the expiration date established under RCW 58.17.140. The time period for subdivisions shall commence upon the date of preliminary plat approval by the issuance of a written decision by the Edmonds Hearing Examiner. In the event that the decision of the hearing examiner is appealed to the Edmonds City Council and/or Snohomish County Superior Court, the time period shall commence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary plat decision by the City Council or judiciary. B. Approval of a short plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of seven years if preliminary short plat approval is issued on or before December 31, 2013 and five years if preliminary short plat approval is issued on or after January 1, 2014, unless the applicant has acquired final short plat approval within the specified time period. The time period for short plats shall commence upon the issuance of a final, written staff decision. In the event that the decision of staff is appealed to the Edmonds Hearing Examiner and/or Snohomish County Superior Court, the time period shall commence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary short plat decision by the Hearing Examiner or judiciary. 20.75.107 Preliminary approval — Time limit extension for previously approved short plats. Short plats that received preliminary approval on or after January 1, 2006 and would have expired prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall have their preliminary approvals automatically extended for a period of two years from the effective date of this ordinance. Preliminary approval of such short plats shall expire and have no further validity at the end of two years from the effective date of this ordinance, unless the applicant has acquired final short plat approval within the specified time period. Attachment 1 Packet Page 191 of 266 Sampling of Time Frames Established for Short Plat Approvals by Other Local Jurisdictions Bothell: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval was issued on or before December 31, 2011 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2012. Everett: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Kenmore: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Kirkland: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Lake Forest Park: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Lynnwood: Valid for 2 years with the opportunity for a 1-year extension. Mill Creek: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015 with the opportunity for an extension. Mountlake Terrace: Valid indefinitely, but planning on changing code to put a limit on it. Mukilteo: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Shoreline: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Woodinville: Valid for 5 years with the opportunity for a 1-year extension if making progress on civil and/or final review. Attachment 2 Packet Page 192 of 266 Statistics of Recent Edmonds Short Plats Presented to Planning Board on February 27, 2013 Year of Application Number of Applications that Received Preliminary Approval Number Recorded Number Expired 5- ear time frame 2005 27 22 5 2000 2C-1 14 r, 2007 13 r~ 0 2008 1CI 3 0 2009 - 2 0 2010 3 0 0 2011 1 4 0 0 2012 2 0 Attachment 3 Packet Page 193 of 266 RCW 58.17.140: Time limitation for approval or disapproval of plats Extensions. Page 1 of 1 * Find Your Legislator Visiting the Legislature * Agendas, Schedules and Calendars * Bill Information * Laws and Agency Rules * Legislative Committees * Legislative Agencies * Legislative Information Center * E-mail Notifications * Civic Education * History of the State Legislature Congress - the Other Washington * TVW * Washington Courts * OFM Fiscal Note Website Access ll+�ashington� RCWs > Title 58 > Chapter 58.17 > Section 58.17.140 58.17.130 << 58.17.140 >> 58.17.150 RCW 58.17.140 Time limitation for approval or disapproval of plats — Extensions. *** CHANGE IN 2013 *** (SEE 1074-S.SL) *** (1) Preliminary plats of any proposed subdivision and dedication shall be approved, disapproved, or returned to the applicant for modification or correction within ninety days from date of filing thereof unless the applicant consents to an extension of such time period or the ninety day limitation is extended to include up to twenty-one days as specified under RCW 58.17.095(3): PROVIDED, That if an environmental impact statement is required as provided in RCW 43.21C.030, the ninety day period shall not include the time spent preparing and circulating the environmental impact statement by the local government agency. (2) Final plats and short plats shall be approved, disapproved, or returned to the applicant within thirty days from the date of filing thereof, unless the applicant consents to an extension of such time period. (3)(a) Except as provided by (b) of this subsection, a final plat meeting all requirements of this chapter shall be submitted to the legislative body of the city, town, or county for approval within seven years of the date of preliminary plat approval if the date of preliminary plat approval is on or before December 31, 2014, and within five years of the date of preliminary plat approval if the date of preliminary plat approval is on or after January 1, 2015. (b) A final plat meeting all requirements of this chapter shall be submitted to the legislative body of the city for approval within nine years of the date of preliminary plat approval if the project is within city limits, not subject to requirements adopted under chapter 90.58 RCW, and the date of preliminary plat approval is on or before December 31, 2007. (4) Nothing contained in this section shall act to prevent any city, town, or county from adopting by ordinance procedures which would allow extensions of time that may or may not contain additional or altered conditions and requirements. [2012 c 92 § 1; 2010 c 79 § 1; 1995 c 68 § 1; 1986 c 233 § 2; 1983 c 121 § 3; 1981 c 293 § 7; 1974 ex.s. c 134 § 8; 1969 ex.s. c 271 § 14.] Notes: Applicability -- 1986 c 233: See note following RCW 58.17.095. Severability -- 1981 c 293: See note following RCW 58.17.010. Packet Page 194 of 266 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=58.17.140 Attachment 4 5/2/2013 development and overnight stays to the City. She considered herself an advocate for the lodging industry as well as the community and is always available to meet personally with prospective applicants to discuss their projects before and during the application process. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the 1% increase in visitor spending in Snohomish County and asked how that compared to other counties in the state and nation. Ms. Spain answered due to the closure of the State Tourism Office, any marketing in Washington State is done by individual destination marketing organizations. In 2012 the Seattle Visitor's Bureau was successful in creating a program similar to the TPA that generated $8 million that was used to advertise the region and Washington State. As a result, Seattle had a much higher increase in visitor spending. Tri-Cities received approximately $1 million in federal grants that was used for tourism promotion; they too saw an increase in visitors. She summarized the increase fluctuates by county. Snohomish County is typically in the top three in regard to visitor spending. She offered to provide the percentage for each county. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the SCTB interacted with the Economic Alliance Snohomish County. Ms. Spain answered Economic Alliance Snohomish County partners with SCTB on specific tourism -related projects. The Alliance's focus is on lobbying efforts and economic development. 8. DISCUSSION: PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE TIME FRAME FOR VALIDITY OF PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAT APPROVAL AS ESTABLISHED IN ECDC 20.75.100 (FILE NO. AMD20130002). Associate Planner Jen Machuga explained a subdivision into four lots or less is considered a short plat. Currently ECDC 20.75.100 limits the validity of preliminary short plat approval to 5 years. During that timeframe, the applicant would need to submit for civil review or provide the City with detailed engineering drawings showing proposed civil improvements associated with the subdivision. Following the City's review and approval of the civil plans, the applicant may either construct or bond for the civil improvements. At the end of that phase of the process, the applicant would then submit for final review where staff checks that all conditions of preliminary short plat approval have been met and the subdivision would be recorded with Snohomish County. In the past this process was completed by most applicants well under the five year time limit. However, the economic downturn caused unanticipated delays to several projects. Recognizing the impact of the economic downturn, State law was revised to increase the timeframe for the validity of formal plats, subdivisions into 5 lots or more, to 7 years for formal plats that received preliminary approval on or before December 31, 2014, after which the timeframe for formal plats will revert to 5 years. At the January 22, 2013 Council meeting a member of the public requested the City consider increasing the current 5 year timeframe for preliminary short plats to 7 years to provide applicants impacted by the economic downturn an opportunity to complete their projects. This was discussed with the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee on February 11, 2013; the committee was receptive to potentially increasing the timeframe and forwarded the item to the Planning Board. The Planning Board held a discussion and a public hearing and recommended approval of extending the current short plat timeframe. Ms. Machuga stated the draft code provides reference to State law requirements regarding the timeframe for formal plats as well as new language related to the timeframe for short plats to increase the timeframe to 7 years for short plats that obtained preliminary approval on or before December 31, 2013, and a 5 year time frame for short plats that obtained preliminary approval on or after January 1, 2014. The draft code establishes the provision to extend the time limit to 2 years from the effective date of the ordinance for short plats that obtained preliminary approval on or after January 1, 2006 and would have expired prior to adoption of the ordinance. She pointed out a public hearing is scheduled on May 7; tonight is intended to provide the Council an overview prior to the public hearing and to answer any questions. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 7 Attachment 5 Packet Page 195 of 266 Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for providing examples she requested of timeframes established for short plat approval for other cities. She expressed her support for moving forward. Councilmember Bloom commented the draft ordinance references RCW 58.17.140 but does not reference the specific time limits established. She asked whether the time limits could be included in the ordinance. City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained that provision of the RCW has changed multiple times in the last few years due to the economic downturn. Rather than amend the City's code whenever the Legislature changes the timeline, it is preferable to reference the applicable RCW. Councilmember Bloom asked the current time limits. Mr. Taraday answered it is as long as 9 years in some cases. Ms. Machuga commented the Legislature made a recent change to the RCW. 9. APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR'S REQUEST FOR AN ADDITIONAL PERIOD OF APPOINTMENT OF ROB CHAVE AS ACTING DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO INCLUDE JANUARY 1, 2013 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013, AND CORRESPONDING OUT OF CLASS PAY. Councilmember Bloom commented her concerns are not related to Rob Chave as the Acting Director but with the process. She referred to the March 6, 2012 minutes in which Mayor Earling stated he understood the Council's interest in a policy change regarding a policy change regarding future appointments and pointing out this is an interim position to last no longer than the end of the year. Her concern was extending this again, relaying everyone dropped the ball by not funding the position in 2013. She recalled the Development Services Director position was vacated by Duane Bowman in 2007/2008. It is a key position that has been vacant for a long time; Mr. Chave has done the job of both the Planning Manager and the Development Services Director last year and was being asked to do it again this year. She wanted to ensure the Development Services Director position was funded during the 2014 budget process. Councilmember Buckshnis advised the out of class pay was included in the 2013 budget. Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding that the Interim Development Services Director position was to end December 31, 2012. Therefore, the 2013 budget process should have included funds for a Development Services Director. Councilmember Buckshnis explained she was aware during the 2013 budget discussions that the position would not be filled due to budget constraints. She expressed support for appointing Mr. Chave to an additional period as the acting director. She suggested the Council discuss whether the Development Services Director position would continue as a vacant position or should be removed. Council President Petso agreed the action taken last year was to appoint an acting director temporarily through yearend and the action tonight is to appoint Mr. Chave to the position temporarily until the end of 2013. She was content to extend the appointment of Mr. Chave for the year and wait until the budget process to discuss the position further. At that time the Council may have levy results and the position could then be considered for restored funding. Council President Petso recalled when the Council discussed the appointment last year, there were questions about the process of appointing an interim director and revisions to Chapter 2. The Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee discussed that for two months and were to review it again but did not. She will schedule it for the next Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee meeting. Mayor Earling explained during the budget process he made a conscious decision not to seek a full-time Development Services Director position and continue with an acting director. He anticipated with benefits, the cost for that position would be $135,000 - $160,000/year. Had that position been filled, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2013 Page 8 Packet Page 196 of 266 PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE TIME FRAME FOR VALIDITY OF PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAT APPROVAL AS ESTABLISHED IN ECDC 20.75.100 (FILE NUMBER AMD20130002) Mr. Lien recalled that the Planning Board discussed this item on February 27th and requested that staff return for a public hearing with a proposal that would extend the time frame for preliminary short plat approval to be consistent with the State's time frame for formal subdivision approval. They also asked that the amendment include a provision to address applications that have already expired. Mr. Lien explained that the State Legislature recently established a seven-year time frame for final approval of formal subdivisions (subdivisions into five or more lots) if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014. However, this time frame does not apply to short plats. Instead, State law (RCW 58.17.060) leaves it up to cities to determine the time within which a short plat must be recorded before it expires. Based on the City's current code, preliminary approval of short plats expires after five years, but the City has the ability to make the time frame shorter or longer. Mr. Lien reported that in January, a citizen approached the City Council with the concern that the current five-year validity of preliminary short plat approval was not long enough, given the recent recession. The citizen asked that the City revise its code requirements to allow seven years for preliminary short plat approval to be consistent with the change in state law related to formal plats. This item was discussed by the Council's Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee on February 1lth, and the committee felt it would be appropriate to increase the current time frame. They forwarded the issue to the Planning Board for discussion and a public hearing. Mr. Lien reviewed the draft code language (Attachment 1), which reflects the Planning Board's direction from February 27th: ECDC 20.75.100.A was changed to reference the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 58.17.140, which is the state's current time frame for preliminary approval of formal subdivisions. By simply referencing the RCW, the City's code will not have to be changed if and when the legislature adopts changes to state law. ECDC 20.75.100.B was added to outline the time frame for preliminary approval of short plats. As proposed, preliminary short plat approval would expire at the end of seven years if issued on or before December 31, 2013 and at the end of five years if issued on or after January 1, 2014. This mirrors the state provisions for formal plats. However, staff is recommending that the time frame switch back to five years at the beginning of 2014, which is one year sooner than what the state regulations afford to formal subdivisions. ECDC 20.75.107 was added to include a provision for extending the time limit for preliminary short plats that would have expired within the past couple of years, giving them two additional years from the effective date of the ordinance to obtain final approval. Ms. McConnell explained that the time frame proposed for short plat preliminary approval is slightly different than the time frame outlined in RCW 58.17.140 for formal subdivision preliminary approval. She explained that the City will need to make changes to their stormwater regulations by 2015 in order to meet the Department of Ecology's new permit requirements. Staff is proposing that the extended time frame for short plat preliminary approval should sunset on December 31, 2013 rather than December 31, 2014 so that new applications can be designed and vested in the updated stormwater code when it becomes effective. Ms. McConnell reviewed that the main purpose of the proposed amendment is to help with those applications that were put on hold due to the economic downturn. She noted that several applications expired over the past two years, many of which had already submitted civil construction plans and were being actively reviewed. However, with the downturn in the economy, some applicants were unable to move forward with the subdivision improvements and their applications expired. The proposed amendment would allow a seven-year timeframe for current preliminary short plat approvals. It would also grant an additional two years to preliminary approval that expired in 2011 and 2012. Ms. McConnell reminded the Board that the Engineering and Planning Departments are working on changes to the subdivision regulations, and the City Council recently directed staff to reorganize the entire Edmonds Community Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 3 Attachment 6 Packet Page 197 of 266 Development Code over the next few years. Another reason for establishing a sunset date of December 31, 2013 is to avoid establishing regulations now that will contradict future proposed changes to the code. Board Member Ellis asked if the extension for expired applications was put forward by the City or if it was the result of a citizen request. Mr. Lien answered that, at the February 27`' Planning Board Meeting, a citizen suggested that the extension should also apply to applications that expired in 2011 and 2012. As currently proposed, the amendment would give these applicants an additional two years to complete the short plat improvements. The Board directed staff to include this change in the draft amendment. Board Member Ellis asked how individuals with expired applications would learn about the extension. Mr. Lien advised that the Planning staff would notify all individuals with expired applications if and when the amendment to extend the time frame is adopted. He emphasized that extending the time frame would not require an application to move an expired application forward. Board Member Ellis asked if staff envisions any legal problems associated with reactivating expired preliminary approvals. Mr. Lien advised that the City Attorney has reviewed the proposed language and did not identify any legal concerns. Vice Chair Stewart asked if the proposed sunset date would cover all of the current applicants who have been waiting for the economy to improve before continuing their project. Ms. McConnell said the proposed seven-year extension would be applicable to all current applications. It would also allow a two-year time frame for all applications that expired in 2011 and 2012. She said the purpose of the revised sunset date is to limit the number of applications that would vest to the existing stormwater code, which will revised in the near future as required by the Department of Ecology. Steve Miles, Edmonds, said he attended the Board's February 27th meeting and was encouraged by their suggestion that Edmonds code should be changed to treat short plats like formal subdivisions and that the time frame for preliminary short plat approval should be extended from five to seven years. He was even more encouraged by the Board's suggestion that the extension could be offered to projects where approval had already expired. Mr. Miles explained that his preliminary approval for a four -lot short plat expired on January 17, 2013. His proposal would have created four lots from two existing lots. Although he partnered with his neighbor to submit the application, he acted as the lead. He said their first application was submitted in November of 2006, and they received preliminary approval in January 2008 and plan approval in mid September 2011. However, the September 2011 approval was too late to start in that construction season, and they were left with only 2012 to build prior to expiration. By that time, the economy had completely tanked and the proposed project was worth less than half what it was at the time of application. Thinking that his situation was not unique, Mr. Miles said he started looking for governmental decisions that might allow them to receive an extension. He was excited to find House Bill 2152, which was unanimously approved by both houses of the Washington State Legislature. The bill extended plat approval to seven years. He said he immediately sent the information to the City and requested an extension. However, he was soon notified that the City's interpretation of House Bill 2152 was that it was not applicable to short plats. While he was devastated and angry, he continued his research by contacting the co-author of the bill, Representative Jan Angel, telling her of the City's denial and the distinction between formal subdivisions and short plats. She offered to write another bill pertaining to short plats, but it would not be done in time to fix his problem. Mr. Miles said he contacted other local jurisdictions and learned that most had applied the extension to both formal subdivisions and short plats. He wrote to Council Member Buckshnis, hoping she would intervene. He said he could not understand why Edmonds had decided not to include short plats when so many others had. Council Member Buckshnis made several inquiries but ultimately responded with disappointing news. He said he spoke with an attorney who assured him that the distinction between short plats and formal subdivisions had been court tested and he should not challenge the City's decision. Mr. Miles said he met once more with City staff prior to the expiration date, asking if they would ask a senior person about House Bill 2152, but this effort was unsuccessful, as well. Staff suggested that he submit a performance bond in lieu of completing the improvements in exchange for a one-year extension. However, the bond cost was twice the cost of resubmitting plans and he knew he would not be ready to build this season. Reapplying and repaying would restart the five - Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 4 Packet Page 198 of 266 year cycle again, and that is what they planned to do until introduced to Donna Breske. She was able to get the City's attention regarding the issue at hand. Mr. Miles summarized that he and his neighbor have lived in Edmonds for more than 30 years. They are homeowners, not developers. Their investments in their properties represent a major portion of their assets and long-term security. He said he knows the legislature wrote the new law with no intent to exclude short plats and to provide relief to people exactly like him. He asked the Planning Board to consider a change to the City code that would extend the short plat expiration to seven years and make the extension retroactive for those applications that have already expired. While the economy may not recover in time for him to take advantage of the extension, he asked that they give him the chance the legislature thought they had provided. Donna Breske, Snohomish, said she is a licensed civil engineer working as a private consultant for the past 12 years. She said she first approached the City Council regarding the time frame for preliminary short plat approval on January 22, knowing there other individuals like her client whose approval had expired or would expire soon. She pointed out that the RCW 58.17.140 allows for an extension of up to seven years for formal subdivisions. The RCW also allows local jurisdictions to set time frames for short plats. She expressed her belief that the proposed amendment is consistent with what other jurisdictions are doing, as well. She said she is pleased with the process and the quick time frame the City has followed to move the amendment forward. Ms. Breske said she recently had a discussion with Ms. McConnell regarding the proposed language for ECDC 20.75.107, which extends the time frame an additional two years for applications that expired in 2011 and 2012. She pointed out that RCW 58.17.130 also has a provision for bonding in lieu of improvements, and the concept is allowed in the City's current code, as well. She explained that this provision is particularly important for individuals who only have two years to complete the application process and build the improvements. The bonding in lieu of provision allows up to one additional year for the applicant to complete construction of the project. She suggested that the following language should be added at the end of ECDC 20.75.107 to help applicants clearly understand the existence of this provision: "... unless the applicant has posted a bond in lieu of improvements." THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED Ms. McConnell explained that there is currently a code provision that allows for bonding in lieu of constructing the improvements so an applicant can move forward with recording the short plat. She expressed her belief that because the provision is outlined elsewhere in the code, it might not be appropriate to add the provisions into ECDC 20.75.107, as well. However, staff could solicit input from the City Attorney regarding this option. Again, she reminded the Board that staff will be working on updates to the subdivision code, recognizing that there are sections of the code that do not flow smoothly. This will be accomplished as part of the code rewrite that will take place over the next two years. Vice Chair Stewart agreed with Ms. Breske that language should be added to ECDC 20.75.107 to make it clear that bonding in lieu of improvements is an option for applicants that are approaching the deadline. Mr. Lien pointed out that bonding in lieu of improvements is addressed in ECDC 20.75.030. He clarified that the proposed amendment would not prohibit an applicant from using this provision. Although not specifically called out in ECDC 20.75.107, it would still be one avenue for final plat approval. Board Member Lovell asked how an applicant would learn about the bonding in lieu of option. Mr. Lien said that as an application approaches the deadline, staff informs the applicants about the bonding option. Ms. McConnell added that in order to post a bond in lieu of improvements, applicants must have approved civil plans in place and activity must be occurring. Mr. Lien pointed out that Mr. Miles testified that the City offered bonding as one option to continue his application. Chair Reed suggested that ECDC 20.75.107 could include a reference to ECDC 20.75.030. While he understands staff s viewpoint, he is also sympathetic to land owners and the need to help them understand the process. Again, Ms. McConnell suggested that this issue would be better addressed as part of the City's overall update and reorganization of the development code to make the processes clearer and more concise. She emphasized that the provision is already available to applicants, Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 5 Packet Page 199 of 266 and staff discusses the option with applicants who are approaching the deadline. Vice Chair Stewart emphasized her desire to at least include a reference to ECDC 20.75.030 to help citizens who are not knowledgeable about the code. Board Member Ellis cautioned that changing the proposed language might require an additional public hearing, thus slowing the process. He suggested the Board move the amendment forward as quickly as possible to give relief to applicants. They can clean up discrepancies with regards to references at a later time, as long as staff consistently points out the bonding option when people get close to the deadline. Mr. Lien advised that staff provides a hand out to applicants outlining the bond in lieu of improvements process. Chair Reed advised that adding a reference to ECDC 20.75.030 in order to provide clarity would not require an additional hearing before the Board makes a recommendation to the City Council. An additional public hearing would only be required if the changes are more substantive. Board Member Lovell said discussions with the staff have satisfied him that most of the code changes associated with the rewrite will involve reorganization to make the document easier to read. The goal is to make it easier to locate code provisions related to any given subject. He said he senses staffs hesitance to insert additional language into ECDC 20.75.107 that already exists elsewhere in the code, and he supports their recommendation. He recommended the Board move forward with a recommendation on the language as currently proposed. Chair Reed suggested that the Board could forward a recommendation regarding the proposed amendment, with an additional recommendation that the City Council consider adding a reference to ECDC 20.75.030. Again, Ms. Breske suggested that additional language could be added to ECDC 20.75.107 to reference the bond in lieu of improvements provision found in ECDC 20.75.030. BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ECDC 20.75.100 AND ECDC 20.75.107 (FILE NUMBER AMD20130002) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER ELLIS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 3-0-1, WITH VICE CHAIR STEWART ABSTAINING. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Chair Reed advised that the April 10`h agenda includes a review of Highway 99 initiatives and the status of redevelopment efforts on Highway 99. He recalled that the Highway 99 Task Force provided a report to the Board in 2009, and the Board has also received presentations regarding projects that are taking place in the International District. Chair Reed said the Board was scheduled to continue their discussions about the Westgate Plan and form -based zoning. However, the discussion was taken off the agenda because an issue was recently raised about whether it would be more appropriate to address both Five Corners and Westgate at the same time. He said that on April 24t' the Board would continue their review of the Edmonds Way BC-EW and RM-EW zoning classifications. He reminded the Board they will start working soon on the code rewrite and they will likely continue their discussions regarding the neighborhood centers, as well. Chair Reed reported that he and Vice Chair Stewart will meet with Mayor Earling on March 29tb to discuss Planning Board priorities. City Council Member Petso will be unable to attend, but he will seek input from her in advance. He said the goal is to schedule a time when all four can meet on a regular basis to discuss agenda priorities and the work the Planning Board is doing. Board Member Lovell reported that at their March 20th meeting, the Economic Development Commission voted to send a proposal to the Planning Board that would essentially make the BD zone primarily retail and restaurant types of uses. They have prepared a draft ordinance for the Board's consideration. Chair Reed agreed to find out more about the status of the EDC's draft ordinance. Vice Chair Stewart pointed out that "development agreements" are not scheduled on the Board's extended agenda or included in the list of items pending for 2013. She recalled that, at their last meeting, Ron Wambolt suggested that this issue be revitalized. Chair Reed agreed to clarify the status of this issue with the City Council's Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee. Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 6 Packet Page 200 of 266 important to allow both projecting and hanging blade signs to meet the needs of each individual building. Board Member Cloutier pointed out that the actual code language states that projecting signs are "attached to or affixed to a building or wall in a manner that is no more than 12 inches from the surface of the building or wall." Mr. Chave explained that, traditionally, awnings are considered part of a building, which means that hanging signs would also be allowed. He cautioned against making more extensive changes to the sign code now, given that it will be reorganized and updated later in the year. Board Member Duncan referred to ECDC 22.43.060(B)(1)(h) and asked if the design standards require artwork and wall graphics to cover a certain percentage of a wall. Mr. Chave answered that there is no minimum coverage for artwork and wall graphics. Given that there is no minimum coverage requirement for the other elements in ECDC 22.43.060(B)(1), Board Member Duncan questioned the appropriateness of identifying a minimum coverage for green walls. The Board remainder of the Board agreed. CHAIR REED MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD ECDC 16.43 (BD —DOWNTOWN BUSINESS) AND ECDC 22:43 (DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE BD ZONE) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS REVISED PER THE BOARD'S DISCUSSION. BOARD MEMBER CLARKE SECONDED THE MOTION. Board Member Lovell referred to the comments he made at the last meeting regarding the proposal. Since that time, he has listened to the comments and suggestions that have been offered and has read the various emails and written materials pertaining to the proposal once again. He reiterated his belief that the City does not need to adopt additional design standards for the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones because the design guidelines set forth in the Comprehensive Plan are adequate. In addition, he believes the staff and developers have the ability to figure out what is appropriate for downtown Edmonds, given the design guidelines contained in the Comprehensive plan and the zoning regulations. He said he supports the proposed provision that would exempt blade signs from the sign code area calculation limitations, but he will abstain from voting on the motion because he believes the recommendation the Board forwarded to the City Council in 2011 is very adequate and appropriate. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0-1, WITH BOARD MEMBER LOVELL ABSTAINING. DISCUSSION ON INCREASING TIME FRAME FOR VALIDITY OF PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAN APPROVAL (FILE NUMBER AMD20130002) Ms. Machuga said the purpose of this discussion is to consider the option of increasing the time frame for validity of preliminary short plat approval for subdivisions of fewer than five lots. She briefly reviewed the current short plat process, which consists of three phase: During the Preliminary Review, the City reviews the proposal based on the zoning regulations, critical areas regulations, etc. and identifies the conditions necessary for the subdivision to comply with the code. This process takes about three to five months to complete. As part of the Civil Review, an applicant provides more detailed engineer drawings showing the proposed civil improvements. This process usually takes three months to complete. During the Final Review, the City reviews the final documents to make sure all of the conditions from the preliminary approve are met. This process typically takes about a month to complete. Ms. Machuga explained that the current code causes preliminary approval of short plats to expire after five years. That means an applicant has five years after preliminary approval to complete the civil and final review processes and for the subdivision to be recorded. She advised that in 2010 and 2012, the State extended the time frame for formal subdivisions (five or more lots) to allow up to seven years for final approval if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014. The time frame for final approval for formal subdivisions that received preliminary approval before December 31, 2007 was extended to nine years. The time frame reverts back to five years for final approval when preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. However, state law does not mandate a deadline for short plats, so it is up to each jurisdiction to determine the appropriate time frame. She advised that some jurisdictions have changed their time frames for short plat approval to mirror the state's time frames for formal plat approval. She referred to Attachment 1, which provides a sampling of time frames established by other local jurisdictions for short plat approvals. Planning Board Minutes February 27, 2013 Page 5 Attachment 7 Packet Page 201 of 266 Ms. Machuga provided a chart to illustrate the number of applications the City received for preliminary short plat approval from 2005 through 2102. The chart also identifies the number of applications that expired before final approval was obtained. She advised that about half of the applications that expired had reached the civil review stage, and several got part way through the final phase but were never recorded. Ms. Machuga said staff presented this issue to the City Council's Planning and Public Works Committee on February 1 Vh, and the Committee felt it would be appropriate to increase the current five-year time frame and/or add provisions for an extension to the current time frame. They moved to forward the item to the Planning Board for discussion and a public hearing. Ms. Machuga cautioned that vesting is always a consideration when changing time frames. When time frames are extended, it potentially means that newer regulations will take longer to implement through actual development. She particularly referred to the City's stormwater requirements and explained that as stormwater codes are updated, they typically become stricter than the previously established requirements. She emphasized that the timing for vesting to code requirements should be taken into account when determining whether the validity of a preliminary short plat approval should be increased. Something else to consider is whether or not the time frame for applications that have already expired should also be extended. They could also add a provision for the extended time frame to sunset after a certain date. Board Member Lovell asked for further clarification about the implications an extension could have on the City's ability to implement new stormwater requirements. Ms. Machuga explained that an application is vested to the regulations (including stormwater requirements) that are in place at the time of preliminary approval. Mr. Chave added that, once preliminary approval has been obtained, an applicant currently has five years to complete the civil and final review processes. An extension would allow more time, but it would also result in a longer period of time when an applicant is vested to potentially older conditions. Board Member Duncan asked if it would be possible for the extension to be contingent upon how close an application is to current code standards. Mr. Chave said that not only would this be difficult; but given the time frames they are talking about, it would probably be unnecessary. For example, the changes to the stormwater code over the next few years will not likely be significant. Board Member Clarke expressed his belief that the issue could be adequately addressed by increasing the time frame for short subdivision approval to be consistent with the state's extension for formal subdivision approval. In addition to increasing the time frame for short plat approval, Ms. Machuga said staff believes it would also be helpful to have the option of extending both short plat and formal subdivision applications for a short time to relieve pressure as the deadline approaches. She cautioned that if the Board recommends an increase in the time frame for short plat preliminary approval, they should also recommend a sunset provision similar to the current state law for formal subdivisions. She pointed out that, in a good economy, short plats can be completed in six months to a year. If the Board recommends a time frame for short plats that is similar to the state's timeline for formal subdivisions, Board Member Clarke asked if staff is also recommending an additional extension option for both short plats and formal subdivisions. Mr. Chave clarified that the issue currently before the Board can be addressed by simply applying the state's current time frame for formal subdivisions to short plats, as well. He cautioned that the issue related to extensions for both short plats and formal subdivisions is more complicated and could be dealt with as part of the code reorganization and update process. He emphasized that the change is needed to address current economic problems. Getting into a long, drawn out discussion about the time frame and potential options for extension could postpone final action until the window is passed. He advocated keeping the solution simple at this time. Chair Reed asked if all code requirements are vested at the time of preliminary approval. Mr. Chave answered that only the development regulations pertaining to the subdivision of land are applicable to short plat and formal subdivision applications. All other building and development code requirements would be addressed as part of a building permit application. Board Member Duncan asked if a preliminary short plat approval would be transferrable to a new owner. Ms. Machuga answered affirmatively. Mr. Chave commented that if the Board recommends an extension of the time frame for current applications, it seems only fair to grant extensions for recently expired applications, as well. Ms. Machuga pointed out that nine short plat applications Planning Board Minutes February 27, 2013 Page 6 Packet Page 202 of 266 expired in 2012 and three have expired in 2013. Several of these applicants had already started the civil review process. Because of the current economy, the availability of financing, and the speculative nature of development, Board Member Clarke felt this would be a fair option to consider. Two members of the audience indicated a desire to speak to the Board about the timeline for short plat preliminary approval, and the Board unanimously agreed to allow them an opportunity to speak. Steve Miles, Edmonds, said his preliminary short plat approval expired in January 2013. Knowing of the impending expiration, he looked into possible solutions. He was excited to learn about the state's extended timeline for formal subdivisions, but was disappointed to discover that it did not apply to short plats. He continued to research the issue and contacted State Representative Jan Angel, who co-author the state provision related to formal subdivisions. She was surprised to learn there was a distinction between short plats and formal subdivisions. She said she fully meant for the law to apply to both situations. He said he is not a builder or a developer, and he has owned his property for 30 years. It took four years to complete the preliminary short plat approval, leaving only one construction season to build. The outcome of the project is now worth only one third of its value when he originally applied for the short plat in January 2008. He expressed his belief that the new state law was meant specifically for his situation. He urged the Board to consider changing the short plat timeline to be consistent with the state timeline. He said that although only two new homes would be constructed on his property, he has agreed to voluntarily upgrade the stormwater system to accommodate four homes. Donna Bresky, Civil Engineer, said she was recently approached by a client regarding property that has preliminary approval from the City of Edmonds for a three -lot short plat that expires in March. She said staff s explanation of the short plat process left out the fact that after completing the preliminary and civil reviews, an applicant must also complete actual construction of the subdivision (stormwater, sewer stubs, frontage improvements, surveys, etc.) before obtaining final approval for the short plat to be recorded. While the current time frame for short plat approval is sufficient in a good economy, the recent recession made it difficult for developers to obtain financing to complete construction of the subdivision improvements. While the financing situation has improved, she was shocked to learn that the City watched nine short plat applications expire in 2012 without taking action to extend the timeline. She said she approached City staff, pointing out that other cities have already extended their timelines. Staffs response was for her to take the issue to the City Council, which she did. Ms. Bresky said that while she is glad the City is finally trying to address the issue, they should have taken action two or three years ago. She said she believes the Board has a clear understanding of the need for change. She said her client is looking to purchase a three -lot short plat with preliminary approval, but there is not enough time to do the civil engineering work and get final approval before the preliminary approval expires in March. She pointed out that extending the timeline for an additional two years, consistent with the state's extension for formal subdivisions, would allow developers enough time to complete construction work as weather conditions allow. She pointed out that if the proposed change is approved, her client will contract her to do the civil engineering work, which means money in her pocket. She emphasized that the recession has resulted in a difficult scenario for civil engineers. As per the Board's discussion, staff agreed to prepare a proposal that would extend the time frame for preliminary short plat approval to be consistent with the state's time frame for formal subdivision approval, with a provision to address those applications that have already expired. The Board scheduled a public hearing on the proposal for March 27, 2013. DISCUSSION ON CITY -SPONSORED REZONE OF 22133 — 76TH AVENUE WEST Mr. Clugston said that as part of a potential redevelopment being considered at the Doug's Mazda site on Highway 99, staff did some research regarding a contract rezone that would be part of the project. He found that the rectangular parcel at 22133 — 76th Avenue West (Parcel A) was rezoned in 1988 from RM-2.4 to a contract CG. Unfortunately, the zoning map was not properly updated at the same time. This parcel should have been shown as a contract CG designation and the small area to the northwest (Parcel B) should have remained as RM-2.4. Mr. Clugston further explained that in 1995, the City sponsored and approved an area -wide rezone for most of the remaining RM-2.4 parcels, with the clear intent of rezoning the whole area between 220th and 224tb from 76th Avenue West to Highway 99 to CG2. However, because the 1988 contract rezone was not accurately shown on the zoning map, the area was not Planning Board Minutes February 27, 2013 Page 7 Packet Page 203 of 266 Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee Minutes February 11, 2013 Page 2 6. Report on final construction costs for the 76t" Ave W/75t" PI. W Walkway and 162"d St. Park Project (Haines Wharf Park) and acceptance of the project. Mr. English discussed the final project costs for the 76t" Ave W/75t" PI. W Walkway and 162nd St. Park Project (Haines Wharf Park). ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. 7. Authorization for the Sole Source Procurement of the "Sludge -Mate" Containers for the Vactor Waste Facility Retrofit at the Public Works Yard. Mr. Williams provided a summary of how the Sludge -Mate Containers would be used at the Public Works Yard. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. 8. Energy Savings Contract (ESCO) III. Mr. Williams discussed the scope of the Energy Savings Contract. ACTION: Recommend Staff presentation to the City Council. 9. PROS Plan RFQ. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. 10. City Park RFQ for Landscape Architecture services. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. 11. Consideration of the citizen request to increase time frame for validity of preliminary short plat approval from five years to seven years. Ms. Machuga discussed the current time frame requirements for preliminary short plat approval and explained that the city can amend the code to increase the current time frame or to provide for an extension. Planning and Engineering staff discussed some of the potential implications of changing the current time frame requirements. ACTION: This item was re -opened following Public Comments, and the Committee moved to Planning Board for review with recommendation that the current time frame be increased and/or provisions are added to the code for an extension. 12. Potential rezone of 22133 761" Avenue West. Mr. Clugston discussed a discrepancy on the zoning map at this parcel and possible solutions. Attachment 8 Packet Page 204 of 266 AM-5717 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: 30 Minutes Submitted For: Jerry Shuster Department: Engineering Review Committee: Type: Information Information Submitted By: Committee Action: Subject Title Presentation: Willow Creek Daylight Early Feasibility Study/Edmonds Marsh. Recommendation Information Only. Previous Council Action 13. Megan Luttrell On August 20, 2012, Council approved acceptance of a grant from the State through the Salmon Recovery Board (SRFB) and the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) for a limited feasibility study for the daylighting of Willow Creek from the Edmonds Marsh to Puget Sound. Narrative This project is exploring the feasibility of maximizing Chinook salmon rearing habitat in Edmonds Marsh through daylighting a connection between Willow Creek and Puget Sound. The original sponsor (recipient) of the RCO grant was the non-profit organization People for Puget Sound (PfPS). On October 1, 2012, PfPS closed its doors, and the remaining grant dollars were transferred to the City for completion of the Early Feasibility Study. This presentation provides the results of the Early Feasibility Study and discusses the next steps in the project schedule. Keeley O'Connell, formerly of PfPS, now with the non-profit Earth Corps, continues on a contract basis with the City as the main project coordinator. Fiscal Impact: The grant was added to the Stormwater Capital Fund in 2012 and combined with the City's $50,000 in matching funds ($50,000 total) to complete the project Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering Megan Luttrell 05/02/2013 03:53 PM Public Works Kody McConnell 05/02/2013 03:54 PM City Clerk Linda Hynd 05/02/2013 03:56 PM Mayor Dave Earling 05/03/2013 08:23 AM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 05/03/2013 08:38 AM Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 05/01/2013 04:01 PM Packet Page 205 of 266 Final Approval Date: 05/03/2013 Packet Page 206 of 266 AM-5720 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: 30 Minutes Submitted By: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Review Committee: Type: Information Information Committee Action: 14. Subject Title Continued discussion on incorporating the Harbor Square Master Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. Recommendation Discuss next steps in the Harbor Square plan process. Previous Council Action The City Council heard an introduction to the Harbor Square Master Plan at the November 20, 2012 City Council meeting, with subsequent public hearings held on December 4 and December 18, 2012. The December 18th public hearing was continued to January 29, 2013, and deliberation was continued to February 5, 2013. At the February 5, 2013 meeting, the City Council requested staff to develop a modified draft of the Harbor Square Master Plan based on comments provided by City Council and testimony received during the Public Hearings. Review of a potential revised version of the Harbor Square plan began during the March 19, 2013 meeting and continued review during the March 26, 2013, with the Council voting to use the staff revisions to the Plan (as contained in Exhibit 2) as a basis for discussion rather than the Port's original proposal (Exhibit 1). At the April 16, 2013 Council meeting, the Council discussed the Port of Edmonds withdrawl of their application to incorporate the HSMP into the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Council continued discuss to May 7, 2013 when a full Council would be present. Narrative Given that the Port has withdrawn their application for a master plan, the Council needs to discuss how it wants to proceed. If the Council desires to continue with planning for Harbor Square, this would require docketing a new plan proposal that would need to go through the entire planning process. This would necessitate substantial staff time, review and hearing(s) by the Planning Board, and subsequent review and hearing(s) by the City Council. Given current priorities and staffing levels, we have serious concerns about whether we have sufficient resources to undertake this work. The exhibits with this agenda packet are the same ones provided the Council for March l 9th. Also included are the Port of Edmonds Application Withdrawal letters (Exhibit 6). Attachments Packet Page 207 of 266 Exhibit 1 - Port of Edmonds' Harbor Square Master Plan Exhibit 2 - Harbor Square Master Plan - City Council Discussion Draft Exhibit 3 - Harbor Square Master Plan Issue Table Exhibit 4 - Council Member Petso's revised Downtown Master Plan Exhbit 5 - Council Member Fraley-Monillas email Exhibit 6 - Port of Edmonds Application Withdrawal Letter Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Linda Hynd Form Started By: Kernen Lien Final Approval Date: 05/02/2013 Form Review Date 05/02/2013 09:34 AM 05/02/2013 10:50 AM 05/02/2013 11:14 AM Started On: 05/02/2013 08:17 AM Packet Page 208 of 266 New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Harbor Square Redevelopment Plan APRIL 18, 2012 Revised for Planning Board Review August 29. 2012 INTRODUCTION The Harbor Square Redevelopment Plan has been prepared as an amendment to the Port's Master Plan. Its purpose is to provide a framework and solid foundation for the eventual redevelopment of the 11-acre site into an economically feasible, environmentally responsible, and well -designed mixed -use transit -oriented development in the City's Downtown Waterfront District. Harbor Square is an important component of the Port's overall property holdings and when redeveloped will further the Port's statutory directive of "engaging in economic development programs" to benefit constituents of the Port District as well as the overall Edmonds community. The Harbor Square Redevelopment Plan provides important site planning and design principles to be used for future development plans. The preparation and adoption of the Plan is in the midst of a multi -phased planning process. Completed, ongoing, and future phases include: Phase 1 (complete) Prepared a generalized fiscal impact analysis of site redevelopment scenarios. Phase 2 (complete) An extensive outreach program to define the community's preferred use, connections, and design principles for the Harbor Square Redevelopment Plan. Phase 3 (ongoing) Port Commissioners will adopt the Redevelopment Plan into the Port Master Plan. Following Planning Board public hearings and action by the Edmonds City Council the Redevelopment Plan, if approved, will be incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Plan. Packet Page 209 of 266 Phase 4 (Future) Following approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment by the Edmonds City Council, The Port will market the project to solicit responsible development interests. With the selection of a developer by the Port, negotiations between the Port and City will occur to address project issues including rezoning of the site, site layout, design issues, impact mitigation and other site development issues. Resolution of project issues will likely occur through the preparation and approval of a rezone and/or development agreement involving the City, the Port and the selected developer. Upon approval of the development agreement by the Edmonds City Council construction documents will be prepared and submitted to the City for review and approval. Implementation of the Harbor Square Redevelopment Plan is intended to occur over several years, depending on the economic climate, existing lease arrangements and site planning considerations. REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND CONCEPT The Port has identified opportunities to redevelop the Harbor Square site with a mix of residential, office, and retail uses that promote economic development, environmental responsibility, and a high quality design character. The redevelopment concept includes increased public access opportunities and other amenities that capitalize on the site's waterfront setting and adjacency to Edmonds Marsh. Public benefits include an expanded tax base, increased downtown activity, enhanced connections between downtown and the waterfront, an improved pedestrian environment, promotion of transit oriented development, improved ecology, and increased waterfront view opportunities with public gathering places. Consistency with Edmonds Comprehensive Plan This Master Plan is consistent with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan and pursues a number of the Plan's goals and policies. Most of the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies relevant to Harbor Square are located in the Waterfront Activity Center element. Below are some of the goals and policies from that element that guide this master plan. Additionally, the Physical Design Principles included in this Master Plan implement the design -specific Comprehensive Plan policies which are listed in that section. Comprehensive Plan goals and policies are identified in "italics." Comprehensive Plan Goals • Promote downtown Edmonds as a setting for retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, and as a destination for visitors from throughout the region. • Define the downtown commercial and retail core along streets having the strongest pedestrian links and pedestrian -oriented design elements, while protecting downtown's identity. Identify supporting arts and mixed use residential and office areas which support and complement downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong central retail core at residential uses in the area surrounding this retail core area. Emphasize and plan for links between the retail core and these supporting areas. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 210 of 266 2 • Develop gateway/entrance areas into downtown which serve complementary purposes (e.g. convenience shopping, community activities). • Explore alternative development opportunities in the waterfront area, such as specifically encouraging arts -related and arts -complementing uses. Comprehensive Plan Policies • E.1. Ensure that the downtown waterfront area continues - and builds on - its function as a key identity element for the Edmonds community. • E.5. Extend Downtown westward and connect it to the shoreline by encouraging mixed -use development and pedestrian -oriented amenities and streetscape improvements, particularly along Dayton and Main Streets. Development in this area should draw on historical design elements found in the historic center of Edmonds to ensure an architectural tie throughout the Downtown Area. • E.8. Improve and encourage economic development opportunities by providing space for local businesses and cottage industries and undertaking supporting public improvement projects. • E.9. Enhance shoreline features to include a full spectrum of recreational activities, park settings, natural features (such as the Edmonds Marsh), and marina facilities. Improve public access to the shoreline and link waterfront features by establishing a continuous esplanade along the shoreline. The esplanade will be constructed over time through public improvements and Shoreline Master Program requirements placed on private development. • E.11. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, downtown commercial activity and visitors from throughout the region. • E.12. Support a mix of uses downtown which includes a variety of housing, commercial, and cultural activities. The Comprehensive Plan identifies individual districts within Edmonds Waterfront. Harbor Square is located in the "Downtown Master Plan District" and the Comprehensive Plan describes the intent for this district as quoted below: Downtown Master Plan. The properties between SR-104 and the railroad, including Harbor Square, the Edmonds Shopping Center (former Safeway site), and extending past the Commuter Rail parking area up to Main Street. This area is appropriate for design -driven master planned development which provides for a mix of uses and takes advantage of its strategic location between the waterfront and downtown. The location of existing taller buildings on the waterfront, and the site's situation at the bottom of "the Bowl, " could enable a design that provides for higher buildings outside current view corridors. Any redevelopment in this area should be oriented to the street fronts, and provide pedestrian -friendly walking areas, especially along Dayton and Main Streets. Development design should also not ignore the railroad side of the properties, since this is an area that provides a "first impression" of the city from railroad passengers and visitors to the waterfront. Art work, landscaping, and modulated building design should be used throughout any redevelopment project. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 211 of 266 3 Planning Principles The concept diagram on the next page illustrates the planning principles developed during Phase 2 of the planning process. The principles serve as design objectives and form the basis for the Plan Elements. The design intent as it relates to the uses, building character, circulation and parking, public spaces, and sustainability is defined below. ♦_W� LEGEND 114 Vehicle access and parking Pedestrian oriented storefronts and Village plaza actimlies Residentia[ Village -- - -- - - Pdrnary pedestrian route ❑ Mixed -use Gateway architectural element ■ ■ ■ W ■ Atlraciive streetscape edge Principles 1. Create a pedestrian entry and visual gateway at the Highway 104 / Dayton Street intersection which is the key link to downtown Edmonds. 2. Create an attractive street front along Highway 104. 3. Feature pedestrian -friendly facades and uses along Dayton Street W. 4. Establish a pedestrian -friendly esplanade with adjacent activities between the plaza (1) and the marsh. 5. Connect pedestrian walkways to linkages around the marsh. 6. Provide vehicular access into the site from Dayton Street W. 7. Provide direct pedestrian access to the marsh from Hwy 104. 8. Create a pedestrian focus such as a village green or plaza in the center of the redevelopment. 9. Locate residential development in the southeast portion of the site. 10. Locate parking near the western perimeter, next to the railroad, within a parking structure designed to serve the entire redevelopment 11. Architectural character should emphasize a "Northwest Style" compatible with the rest of downtown and feature high quality traditional materials and a variety of colors, forms, and textures. 12. Provide improved vegetation buffers to protect and enhance the Edmonds marsh. 13. Provide for a well -landscaped, Northwest -oriented, small town design theme. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 212 of 266 n PLAN ELEMENTS The Port will incorporate the following elements into the redevelopment of Harbor Square through design guidelines or conditions of purchase/sale agreement(s). Uses and Site Planning • Create a "village" character with pedestrian gathering spaces. • Create an attractive street front along SR104 as an entry into downtown, with a pedestrian and visual "gateway" at the SR104/Dayton Street intersection. • Locate most of the residential development in the southeast corner and southern part of the site in a village setting or well landscaped complex. • Introduce a mix of uses that complement downtown and that provide optimal tax revenue and other benefits to the City and Port, including pedestrian oriented retail and a residential mix geared toward a range of incomes. Circulation, Traffic and Parking • Provide vehicular access from Dayton Street approximately midway between SR104 and the railroad. • Locate most of the parking near the western perimeter of the site, next to the railroad. Parking could be enclosed in an above ground structure designed to serve the entire site. • Keep interior streets narrow to slow traffic and put the emphasis on pedestrians. • Provide for bicycle circulation with shared use trails, bike lanes and/or safe shared lanes on internal streets. Public Amenities • Create a pedestrian entry plaza to Harbor Square that invites public use and provides a visual gateway to Edmonds Marsh from the intersection at SR104/Dayton Street. This public entry point will serve as a key link to downtown Edmonds and also create a pedestrian focus such as a village green or public plaza in the center of Harbor Square that provides space for public activities such as concerts, performances, fairs or an outdoor market. • Establish a pedestrian friendly esplanade with compatible adjacent activities and building facades that extends from the public plaza at the corner of SR104/Dayton Street across Harbor Square to Edmonds Marsh.. • Create active sidewalk/pedestrian areas with retail spaces that open onto the Dayton Street W sidewalk. Small scale pedestrian spaces should be integrated between the development and the streetscape. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan rj Packet Page 213 of 266 • Connect pedestrian walkways to linkages around Edmonds Marsh and to City-wide bike and pedestrian routes. Orient development in a manner that connects Harbor Square to downtown and the waterfront. • Provide direct pedestrian access to Edmonds Marsh from SR104. • Provide a civic/cultural/view point/interpretive element within the development as a public benefit. • Include bicycle connections and facilities (e.g.: storage racks) in circulation and open space planning. consistent with a village scale Flexible (retaillresidential) space on the ground floor Visual connection from �-���' = ` Dayton/SIR corner through the site to the marsh----,� Internal site connection to the marsh trail as well as the city wide trail system Pedestrian oriented central esplanade with Low Impact Development (LID) elements such as pervious pavement, rain gardens, etc. Public spaces for onsite residents and Edmonds as a whole Pedestrian friendly esplanade extending from public plaza at corner of SR104/Dayton Street across Harbor Square to Edmonds Marsh Sustainability Edmond's Comprehensive Plan includes a Community Sustainability Element with goals and poli- cies to increase the city's sustainability based on three principles: flexibilityto adapt to changing conditions, a holistic approach that integrates multiple actions to address the broad range of issues and a long term perspective that extends beyond the typical 20 year GMA time frame. Among the most relevant of this section's policies are: (See pages 19 through 26 in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan) New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 214 of 266 e A.3 Integrate land use plans and implementation tools with transportation, housing, cultural and recreational, and economic development planning so as to form a cohesive and mutually -supporting whole. B.1 Undertake a multi -modal approach to transportation planning that promotes an integrated system of auto, transit, biking, walking and other forms of transportation designed to effectively support mobility and access. 8.4 When undertaking transportation planning and service decisions, evaluate and encourage land use patterns and policies that support a sustainable transportation system. D.3 Explore and employ alternative systems and techniques, such as life -cycle cost analysis, designed to maximize investments and/or reduce ongoing maintenance and facilities costs. E.4 Land use and regulatory schemes should be designed to encourage and support the ability of local residents to work, shop, and obtain services locally F.2 Recreational opportunities and programming should be integrated holistically into the City's infrastructure and planning process G.1 Land use and housing programs should be designed to provide for existing housing needs while providing flexibility to adapt to evolving housing needs and choices. G.2 Housing should be viewed as a community resource, providing opportunities for residents to choose to stay in the community as their needs and resources evolve and change over time. The Harbor Square Master Plan responds to these policies in several ways. The multi -functional uses proposed for the site and the connections to downtown and the waterfront called for in Master Plan's Planning Principles reflect the objectives of policies A.3 and EA Proximity and connections to bus, rail and ferry service respond to the transportation policies, especially B.1 and B.4. The Master Plan provisions directly below include an emphasis on green building and green infrastructure solu- tions as called for in Policy D.3 and the integrated pedestrian and bicycle scheme and supporting principles as well as provision for the athletic club and the marsh boardwalk address Policy F.2's call for integrated recreational opportunities. Finally, the Master Plan encourages a residential type and setting unique in Edmonds. Below are additional provisions to Edmonds' sustainability objec- tives. • Incorporate into individual buildings and the overall site redevelopment both low energy and low water consumption techniques, as well as other strategies to minimize carbon footprint. Employ alternative systems and techniques, such as life -cycle cost analysis, designed to maximize investments and/or reduce ongoing maintenance and facilities costs Provide improved natural vegetated buffers and building setbacks to protect and enhance Edmonds Marsh. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 215 of 266 • Incorporate low impact development (LID) elements, such as pervious pavements and rain gardens to reduce undesirable run-off. • Contribute to day -lighting Willow Creek and improving the site's ecological value. Dayton Street sidewalk character Physical Design Criteria In order to direct the development of Harbor Square in an orderly manner to create a unified and attractive complex, the Port of Edmonds will establish design standards or guidelines that direct the design of individual buildings and spaces. The standards or guidelines will be used along with other zoning code and municipal code regulations to review projects within Harbor Square. The criteria are intended to be consistent with and implement the following goals and policies in Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Downtown Waterfront Activity Center element: New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 216 of 266 E.14. Encourage opportunities for new development and redevelopment which reinforce Edmonds' attractive, small town pedestrian oriented character. Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources. These historic structures are a key component of the small town character of Edmonds and its economic viability. Height limits that reinforce and require pedestrian -scale development are an important part of this quality of life, and should be implemented through zoning regulations and design guidelines. • E.17. Provide pedestrian -oriented amenities for citizens and visitors throughout the downtown waterfront area, including such things as: o Weather protection, o Street trees and flower baskets, o Street furniture, o Public art and art integrated into private developments, o Pocket parks, o Signage and other way -finding devices, o Restrooms. E 18. Strive for the elimination of overhead wires and poles whenever possible. E.19. Coordinate new building design with old structure restoration and renovation. E20. Develop sign regulations that support the pedestrian character of downtown, encouraging signage to assist in locating businesses and public and cultural facilities while discouraging obtrusive and garish signage which detracts from downtown pedestrian and cultural amenities. E21. Provide lighting for streets and public areas that is designed to promote comfort, security, and aesthetic beauty. • E.22. Building design should discourage automobile access and curb cuts that interfere with pedestrian activity and break up the streetscape. Encourage the use of alley entrances and courtyards to beautify the back alleys in the commercial and mixed use areas in the downtown area. The criteria described below present the general objectives and parameters that the standards or guidelines will implement. The physical design criteria for Harbor Square are necessarily general in nature because a specific lay -out for the complex will depend on development considerations and opportunities at the time. As noted above, they are intended to provide general guidance rather than serve as immutable standards. See site development objectives the Uses and Site Planning, Circulation and Traffic, and Public amenities sections. Height and Bulk Buildings should be no higher than 55' above grade except for 1) roof -top equipment and other appurtenances that are not visible from ground level and do not block significant views, and 2) special architectural features such as a tower, sculpture, etc. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 217 of 266 9 All structures above 35' in height should not diminish the "human scale" experience of pedestrians on Dayton Street or decrease sunlight on the street. To that end, all buildings over 35' should be set back at least 1' horizontally away from Dayton Street for every 1' in height above 35' above grade. (This results in in significant additional sun shading or perception of a taller building by a pedestrian on Dayton.) The schematic section below illustrates these relationships. Buildings modulated and enhanced with landscaping to provide pleasant pedestrian promenade from 104th/Dayton to the Marsh trail Buildings along All portions of buildings Dayton Avenue no (above 35' tall) set back taller than 4 from Dayton St. stories - sidewalk at least one foot horizontally for every one foot in height above 35' r: Ir.;n Vegetated setback & marsh Pedestrian oriented enhancements and boardwalk commercial activities on per Edmonds SMP ground floor along Dayton St. SCHEMATIC SECTION THROUGH HARBOR SQUARE LOOKING WEST Illustrating basic building height and setback requirements Dayton St. Furthermore, the "average building height" of all buildings on the Harbor Square site, taken as a whole shall not exceed 45'. The means of calculating "average building height" shall be as stated in the notes at the end of this Master Plan. Setbacks and Ecological Enhancements along Edmonds Marsh All development within shoreline jurisdiction is subject to the provisions of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Therefore, new buildings and development, including clearing, grading parking areas, etc. will comply with the SMP. Additionally, the Port is committed to improving the ecological health of the marsh and will ensure that new development along the marsh will increase ecological functions. Envisioned improvements include: on -site storm water improvements per the City's Storm Water Management regulations (which will improve water quality), vegetation plantings (buffers), and a nature viewing boardwalk. Small Scale Buildings All buildings should employ horizontal and vertical articulation and other architectural methods to maintain the small scale of Downtown Edmonds. Articulation means placing emphasis on architectural elements such as windows, balconies, fagade modulation, rooflines, etc to visually break down the fagade of a building into smaller pieces. Modulation is the stepping back or projecting forward of portions of a building facade as a means of breaking up the building's apparent bulk. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 218 of 266 10 In general, the articulation should be designed to reduce the scale of buildings so that the horizontal module is no greater than 60' in width. These preliminary dimensional provisions are intended to respond to Downtown Edmonds' historic 60' lot pattern and traditional architecture. Buildings over 35' in height should be horizontally articulated with upper story setbacks, different materials or window patterns on different stories, balconies, canopies or other means. Street Orientation Dayton Street Frontage The ground floor of buildings fronting on Dayton Street should feature "pedestrian oriented facades" and "pedestrian oriented uses". A "pedestrian oriented fagade" is one with transparent windows or window displays along most of the fagade front, pedestrian weather protection, signs oriented to the pedestrian rather than to the automobile passenger, a prominent building entry and other amenities such as building details, lighting, street furniture, etc. A "pedestrian oriented use" is a use that emphasizes human activity on the street such as retail shops, eating and drinking establishments, personal services and service oriented offices, etc. Buildings fronting on Dayton Street should either front directly on the street or be separated by a pedestrian oriented space such as a plaza, garden, outdoor seating area, etc. The sidewalk should be at least 15' wide. SR 104 Frontage The site frontage along SR 104 should feature either pedestrian oriented facades or attractive landscaping sufficient to screen the majority of building facades and all parking areas. There should be a pedestrian path along the entire SR 104 frontage. If WSDOT is amenable, the Port should enter into an agreement with WSDOT to improve the SR 104 ROW on the west side of the roadway to provide a much better streetscape, development edge and entry into downtown. Improvements should include street trees, landscaping, and if appropriate, a shared use (bike/pedestrian) trail. Architectural Character Provide for a well landscaped, Northwest oriented, small-town development character. Site Design and Landscaping Use green space that relates to and complements the adjacent uses. Use landscaping to create buffers between sidewalks and adjacent roadways. Notes: Average Building Height" shall be calculated by.• 1. First, multiplying the foot print of each building on the Harbor Square site (as defined in the Harbor Square Master Plan) times the height (as defined in Edmonds Zoning Code) of the New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 219 of 266 11 respective building. (See conditions below for buildings with multiple heights) This calcu- lation will yield the volume for each building. 2. Then, adding together the products calculated in step 1 (building volumes) and dividing that sum by the sum of all building footprints on the Harbor Square site. Provided that: Existing and proposed buildings will be included in the calculations • Where the height of a building varies from portion to another (e.g.: one wing of a building is 3 stories in height and another wing is 5 stories high.) then the building volume (height x foot- print) of each building portion shall be calculated separately. The height of buildings with pitched roofs shall be calculated as the average of the height of the ridge and the lower ea ve. • For phased development where a portion of the site is developed, the maximum average building height for an early phase may exceed 45' if the average height of all buildings on site is less than 45' for all subsequent phases. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 220 of 266 12 Harbor Square Subarea Plan City Council Discussion Draft I March 19, 2013 Notes: This is a discussion draft attempting to illustrate how the Master Plan could be adjusted to respond to some of the public hearing concerns and Council discussion. In general, more details are left to a future zoning process, with any height considerations to be arrived at through an incentive system that would be included in a proposed zoning ordinance. Introduction The Harbor Square Subarea Plan has been prepared as an amendment to the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. Its purpose is to provide a framework and solid foundation for the eventual redevelopment of the 11-acre site into a community asset that will contribute to the City's economic, environmental, and community sustainability. The intent is to take advantage of the subarea's unique location and attributes, including its: • location adjoining the Edmonds Marsh; • proximity to different modes of transit; • located at the bottom of "the bowl", at the southern end of public view corridors; • key location, near both downtown and the city's waterfront • potential ability to take advantage of unique infrastructure opportunities, such as public fiber networks or district heating from the treatment plant. Harbor Square is an important component of the Port's overall property holdings and when redeveloped will further the Port's statutory directive of "engaging in economic development programs" to benefit constituents of the Port District as well as the overall Edmonds community. The Harbor Square Subarea Plan provides important site planning and design principles to be used for future development plans. Because it is a conceptual plan, this subarea plan does not establish any specific amount of square footage (commercial or retail) or any specific number of dwelling units. Following approval of the subarea plan by the Edmonds City Council, the City and Port will engage in more detailed planning to address project issues including rezoning of the site, site layout, design issues, impact mitigation and other site development issues. Resolution of project issues may occur through the preparation and approval of a rezone and/or development agreement involving the City, the Port and, possibly, a selected developer. Implementation of the Harbor Square Subarea Plan is intended to be adopted as a subarea plan consistent with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for the Downtown Waterfront Activity Center. The subarea lies within the "Downtown Master Plan" district identified in Packet Page 221 of 266 the Downtown Waterfront Activity Center, and provides additional guidance for the future development of the Port's Harbor Square property. The plan will be implemented over a number of years, with the timeline depending on such factors as the economic climate, existing lease arrangements, and site planning considerations. Redevelopment Objectives and Concepts A key objective of the plan is that redevelopment of Harbor Square should complement and enhance the other features of the downtown/waterfront area that make it uniquely "Edmonds." These include such things as an active waterfront, natural amenities (notably Edmonds Marsh and the nearby trails and walkways), a pedestrian -oriented downtown that serves as both a business and employment center, and important multi modal transit facilities that provide benefits to both local and regional residents. In recognizing these features and amenities, certain potential concepts emerge that could take advantage of the unique opportunities that the subarea presents: Include a multi -use public space that offers opportunities for community gatherings and events, and providing opportunities to enhance the arts. Protect and enhance the Edmonds Marsh while providing enhanced public use areas and bike and pedestrian pathways that contribute to the larger downtown/waterfront activity area, improving connections between the waterfront and other parts of downtown. Focus on planning for and attracting employers and businesses who could provide a stimulus to the local economy and that take advantage of the site location. The availability of public fiber networks and transit could offer an attractive environment for technology or biotech companies, or arts or business incubators that are more dependent on community amenities and innovation rather than the scale advantages found in larger employment centers. Emphasize a mix of uses that contribute to an active subarea, which should focus on its location and potential for connections between the marsh, the waterfront, and downtown. Residential uses may be allowed that enhance this role, but should not be the principal use of the site. Apply a high level of sustainability principles in the site planning, infrastructure, and building design that takes place within the subarea. The result should be an example for the community to showcase and apply elsewhere. There are numerous examples of similar concepts employed successfully elsewhere. For example, Portland's Pearl District includes the idea of renovation and redevelopment of an older commercial/industrial district into a mixed use zone which includes public open space (Jamison Square) and ecological New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 222 of 266 G restoration (Tanner Springs Park). Themed redevelopment could leverage current interest in small industries such as breweries/brew pubs or arts workshops and galleries, similar to what the City of Tacoma is promoting for parts of its Brewery District. Farmers or arts markets could also be a feature included in this type of plan. Similarly, redevelopment of Harbor Square could seek to encourage space for incubator or start-up businesses, such as the TechStars or SURF Incubators in Seattle or the Environmental Business Cluster in i San Jose. Live/work space for artists a`P patterned after the Artspace Everett hem Lofts could also fit with these '� r t� � 0- 68L suaYcr �+ ' xS VE concepts. � 1 �"l `!` 5��:, p Wulf I• � � The Port of Edmonds has identified opportunities to redevelop the Harbor Square site with a mix of uses that promote economic development, environmental responsibility, and a high quality design character. The redevelopment concept includes increased public access opportunities and other amenities that capitalize on the site's waterfront setting and adjacency to Edmonds Marsh. Public benefits include an expanded tax base, increased downtown activity, enhanced connections between downtown and the waterfront, an improved pedestrian environment, promotion of transit oriented development, improved ecology, and increased waterfront view opportunities with public gathering places. Plan Elements The Port will incorporate the following elements into the redevelopment of Harbor Square through design guidelines or conditions of purchase/sale agreement(s). Uses and Site Planning • Create a "village" character with pedestrian gathering spaces. • Create an attractive street front along SR104 as an entry into downtown, with a pedestrian and visual "gateway" at the SR104/Dayton Street intersection. • Introduce a mix of uses that complement downtown and that further the redevelopment objectives and concepts identified in this plan (see discussion, above). Ensure that the public view corridor down Dayton Street is preserved and enhanced. Circulation, Traffic and Parking Provide vehicular access from Dayton Street approximately midway between SR104 and the railroad. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 223 of 266 3 Locate most of the parking near the western perimeter of the site, next to the railroad. Parking could be enclosed in an above ground structure designed to serve the entire site. Keep interior streets narrow to slow traffic and put the emphasis on pedestrians. Provide for bicycle circulation with shared use trails, bike lanes and/or safe shared lanes on internal streets. Public Amenities Establish a pedestrian friendly esplanade with compatible adjacent activities and building facades that extends from the public plaza at the corner of SR104/Dayton Street across Harbor Square to Edmonds Marsh.. Create active sidewalk/pedestrian areas with retail or other pedestrian -oriented spaces that open onto the Dayton Street sidewalk. Small scale pedestrian spaces should be integrated between the development and the streetscape. Whenever possible, spaces should be designed to be flexible and multi -use. Connect pedestrian walkways to linkages around Edmonds Marsh and to City-wide bike and pedestrian routes. Orient development in a manner that connects Harbor Square to downtown and the waterfront, and that recognizes the vistas toward the Marsh and Puget Sound. Provide direct pedestrian access to Edmonds Marsh from SR104. Include bicycle connections and facilities (e.g. storage racks) in circulation and open space planning. Sustainability Edmonds' Comprehensive Plan includes a Community Sustainability Element with goals and policies to increase the city's sustainability based on three principles: flexibility to adapt to changing conditions, a holistic approach that integrates multiple actions to address the broad range of issues and a long term perspective that extends beyond the typical 20 year GMA time frame. The Harbor Square Subarea Plan is intended to provide a planning framework consistent with the city's sustainability principles. The multi -functional uses proposed for the site and the connections to downtown and the waterfront are intended to support the ability of Edmonds residents to work, shop and obtain service locally, while also serving to promote and support the local economy. Proximity and connections to bus, rail and ferry service respond to the need to integrate land use and transportation. The Subarea Plan provisions directly below include an emphasis on green building and green infra- structure solutions, and the integrated pedestrian and bicycle scheme and supporting principles as well as provision for the athletic club and the marsh boardwalk address the need for integrated rec- New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 224 of 266 M reational opportunities. Below are additional provisions to Edmonds' sustainability objectives. • Incorporate into individual buildings and the overall site redevelopment both low energy and low water consumption techniques, as well as other strategies to minimize carbon footprint. • Employ alternative systems and techniques, such as life -cycle cost analysis, designed to maximize investments and/or reduce ongoing maintenance and facilities costs • Incorporate low impact development (LID) elements, such as pervious pavements and rain gardens to reduce undesirable run-off. stories stepped back to mass High quality design features with long lasting materials Connection to the Landscape buffer between the sidewalk and traffic Spaces for pedestrian activity and gatherings and retail spaces opening onto the sidewalk Pedestrian oriented retail along Dayton Physical Design Criteria In order to direct the development of Harbor Square in an orderly manner and create a unified and attractive complex, the Port of Edmonds will develop design standards and/or guidelines that direct the design of individual buildings and spaces. The standards or guidelines will be used along with other zoning code and municipal code regulations to review projects within Harbor Square. The criteria are intended to be consistent with and implement the goals and policies in the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Downtown Waterfront Activity Center element: The physical design criteria for Harbor Square are necessarily general in nature because a specific lay -out for the complex will depend on development considerations and opportunities at the time. As noted above, they are intended to provide general guidance rather than serve as immutable New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 225 of 266 5 standards. See site development objectives the Uses and Site Planning, Circulation and Traffic, and Public amenities sections. Height and Bulk To implement the plan, future zoning shall provide for a base zoning height no higher than 35' above grade. The zoning may authorize additional bonus height, provided that any bonus height options may only be achieved through the provision of public benefits and/or amenities to be detailed in a subsequent zoning ordinance. The following public benefits and/or amenities are examples of the range of items that might be required in a future zoning ordinance to achieve bonus height on portions of the Harbor Square site [option: up to a maximum of 451: Contribute to day -lighting Willow Creek and improving the site's ecological value. Provide improved natural vegetated buffers and building setbacks to protect and enhance Edmonds Marsh. Provide a civic/cultural/view point/interpretive element within the development as a public benefit. Create a pedestrian entry plaza to Harbor Square that invites public use and provides a visual gateway to Edmonds Marsh from the intersection at SR104/Dayton Street. This public entry point will serve as a key link to downtown Edmonds and also create a pedestrian focus such as a village green or public plaza in the center of Harbor Square that provides space for public activities such as concerts, performances, fairs or an outdoor market. Establish a transfer of development rights program that serves to protect or reduce heights in another sensitive location — identified by the City — in exchange for a height increase at Harbor Square. Setbacks and Ecological Enhancements along Edmonds Marsh All development within shoreline jurisdiction is subject to the provisions of the Edmonds Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Therefore, new buildings and development, including clearing, grading parking areas, etc. will comply with the SMP. Additionally, the Port is committed to improving the ecological health of the marsh and will ensure that new development along the marsh will increase ecological functions. Envisioned improvements could include such features as on -site storm water improvements to improve drainage and water quality, enhanced or restored vegetation plantings and buffers, and a nature viewing boardwalk. Pedestrian Scale Buildings All buildings should employ horizontal and vertical articulation and other architectural methods to maintain the pedestrian scale found in Downtown Edmonds. Articulation means placing emphasis on architectural elements such as windows, balconies, fagade modulation, rooflines, etc to visually break down the fagade of a building into smaller pieces. Modulation is the differential treatment of a building's fagade as a means of breaking up the building's apparent bulk. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 226 of 266 i In general, the articulation should be designed to reduce the scale of buildings so that the horizontal module is no greater than 60' in width. These preliminary dimensional provisions are intended to respond to Downtown Edmonds' historic 60' lot pattern and traditional architecture. Street Orientation Dayton Street Frontage The ground floor of buildings fronting on Dayton Street should feature "pedestrian oriented facades" and "pedestrian oriented uses". A "pedestrian oriented fagade" is one with transparent windows or window displays along most of the fagade front, pedestrian weather protection, signs oriented to the pedestrian rather than to the automobile passenger, a prominent building entry and other amenities such as building details, lighting, street furniture, artwork, etc. A "pedestrian oriented use" is a use that emphasizes human activity on the street such as retail shops, eating and drinking establishments, personal services and service oriented offices, etc. Where these types of uses are not envisioned, artwork, open space, or other amenities could be placed to invite public interaction and interest. Buildings fronting on Dayton Street should either front directly on the street or be separated by a pedestrian oriented space such as a plaza, garden, outdoor seating area, etc. The sidewalk should be at least 15' wide. Consideration should be given to enhance street -side parking to support separating human activity from the traffic along Dayton Street. SR 104 Frontage The site frontage along SR 104 should feature either pedestrian oriented facades or attractive landscaping sufficient to screen the majority of building facades and all parking areas. There should be a pedestrian/multi-use path along the entire SR 104 frontage with connections to other existing and potential walkways. The Port should enter into an agreement with WSDOT to improve the SR 104 ROW on the west side of the roadway to provide a much better streetscape, development edge and entry into downtown. Improvements should include street trees, landscaping, and if appropriate, a shared use (bike/pedestrian) trail. Site Design and Landscaping Use green space that relates to and complements the adjacent uses. Use landscaping to create buffers between sidewalks and adjacent roadways. New or Expanded Elements of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan Packet Page 227 of 266 Harbor S uare Master Plan Council Comments/Suggestions Communicated to Staff How addressed in revised HSMP Residential Uses Comments regarding residential uses from the Council and citizens 1. No residential uses during the Public Hearing process were varied. In the revised HSMP, 2. Limit the extent of residential uses residential uses may be allowed to complement or enhance the overall a. Limit number of units development concept of Harbor Square, but should not be the principal b. Limit location along marsh use of the site. (Page 2) c. Provide for affordable housing d. Encourage live/work units 3. Allow residential development Height and Bulk Height: Heights are addressed on Page 6 of the revised HSMP. Base 1. Keep maximum height at 35 feet zoning heights are limited to 35 feet (as is currently allowed on the site) 2. Base height at 35 feet with possible increase in heights with with potential bonus heights if public benefits and/or amenities are incentives provide or a development rights transfer program is established. An 3. No mention of heights in Comprehensive Plan option is provided to cap any potential increase in height at 45 feet. 4. Establish a transfer of development rights program 5. Development should be pedestrian scale Bulk/Pedestrian Scale: Bulk and pedestrian scale design is addressed in 6. Limit building bulk a number of places in the HSMP including the following sections; Use and Site Planning (Page 3), Public Amenities (Page 4), Height and Bulk (Page 6), Pedestrian Scale Buildings (Pages 6 — 7), Street Orientation (Page 7), and Site Design and Landscaping (Pagel). Page 1 of 5 Packet Page 228 of 266 Harbor S uare Master Plan Council Comments/Suggestions Communicated to Staff How addressed in revised HSMP Buffers, Setbacks, and other Environmental Issues Setbacks and buffers from the Edmonds Marsh will be proscribed 1. Redevelopment not allowed in current "developed footprint". within the updated Shoreline Master Program, which is currently under New development must meet SMP and CAO buffers. review by the City Council. Any future development or redevelopment 2. Provide adequate buffers and setbacks to protect marsh at Harbor Square must comply with the SMP as noted on Page 6 of the 3. Geological Hazard (liquefaction) HSMP. 4. Flooding The HSMP also emphasizes green building and green infrastructure (LID techniques) as noted in the Sustainability section on Pages 4 — 5. Contributing to the day -lighting of Willow Creek and improving the buffers surrounding the Edmonds Marsh are also highlighted as potential incentives under the Height and Bulk section on Page 6. Geological hazard and flooding issues are items that will be dealt with during project level SEPA review. Incorporation into City's Comprehensive Plan The Planning Board recommended that the HSMP be incorporated in 1. Subarea Plan the City's Comprehensive Plan rather just be incorporated by reference 2. Incorporate full text of HSMP (PB Recommendation #12). Whether the HSMP is incorporated 3. Incorporate by reference completely into the Comprehensive Plan or adopted by reference, the effect is the same in that the HSMP would then be part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. This can be implemented through the adopting ordinance. Treating the HSMP as a subarea plan specifically emphasizes that the master plan only applies to the Harbor Square property. Additionally, considering the HSMP as a subarea plan addresses a recommendation from the Planning Board (PB Recommendation #10) that language from the City Attorney's memorandum be incorporated into the adoption of the HSMP. Page 2 of 5 Packet Page 229 of 266 Harbor S uare Master Plan Council Comments/Suggestions Communicated to Staff How addressed in revised HSMP Special Districts or Incentive Zoning: All these ideas are supported in the Redevelopment Objectives and 1. Brewery/distillery/brew pub zone Concepts narrative on Pages 2 — 3 of the HSMP. 2. Create district energy area using waste heat from sewer treatment plant 3. Campus for tech firm or other business 4. Tourists destination (small hotels with first floor restaurants, nightclubs, cafes, art galleries, studios, small shops that sell a variety of item these shops that may sell locally made arts, crafts, and jewelry). 5. Year-round farmers market 6. Roger Brooks' Concepts Parking Parking provided at a redeveloped Harbor Square will have to be 1. Limit parking requirements for residences in order to encourage consistent with the City's off street parking regulations as contained in a single car ECDC 17.50, unless modified in a future zoning change approved by 2. Parking must be adequate for any development Council. Connectivity Improving the connections between the waterfront and downtown is 1. Provide connectivity between waterfront and downtown emphasized in the Redevelopment Objectives and Concepts on Pages 2 2. Provide connectivity to trains, ferries, and buses. — 3. The Public Amenities section on Page 4 also recognizes the need for connections between the waterfront and downtown. Also the Sustainability section on Page 4 notes that the proximity to bus, rail and ferry respond to the need to integrate land use and transportation. Page 3 of 5 Packet Page 230 of 266 Planning Board Recommendations: 1. Building heights shall be limited to 45 feet and consideration may be given for heights up to 55 feet if the development proposal includes significant public amenities and/or sustainable design certification such as LEED Platinum. 2. Development proposals should place the tallest buildings towards the south and west boundaries of the property. 3. Buildings along Dayton Street should be limited to 35 feet in height. 4. Development plans shall ensure that the Public View Corridor down Dayton Street is preserved and enhanced. 5. On page 5 of the Harbor Square Master Plan under "Circulation, Traffic and Parking", an additional sentence should be added to read: "The absence of available off -site parking requires that adequate parking allowance be made to accommodate all customer, employee and resident vehicles during peak use times." 6. At the bottom of page 9 of the Harbor Square Master Plan, the exception to the 55 foot height limit for special architectural features such as a tower, sculpture, etc. should be deleted. 7. In the graphic "Schematic Section through Harbor Square Looking West" on page 10, the annotation as to "setback" above 35 feet along Dayton Street should be revised to "building step back". 8. An additional sentence should be added to the "Dayton Street Frontage" section on page 11 of the Harbor Square Master Plan to read: "Consideration should be given to enhance street -side parking to support separating human activity from the traffic along Dayton Street." 9. On page 11 of the Harbor Square Master Plan under "SR 104 Frontage", "If WSDOT is amendable" should be stricken from the beginning of the third sentence. 10. The Edmonds City Attorney shall develop language consistent with the memorandum dated September 6, 2012 to be incorporated into the City's adoption of the Comprehensive Questions of have been raised about how the Planning Board's recommendations will be incorporated in the HSMP. Some of the recommendations from the Planning Board are no longer applicable with regard to the revised master plan while other recommendations have been incorporated. Below is a summary of how the Planning Board's recommendations have been addressed in the current draft of the HSMP. 1. The specific building heights in the recommendation are no longer applicable. The possibility of allowing some additional height through incentive zoning if certain public amenities are provided has been incorporated in the HSMP in the Height and Bulk section on Page 6. 2. With a base height of 35 feet spelled out in the current draft of the HSMP, this condition is less relevant. If during a subsequent rezone public amenities are provided and a height bonus granted, design and location of the taller building will be addressed at that time. 3. Base height has been limited to 35 feet for the entire site. 4. Language from this condition has been added under the Uses and Site Planning section on Page 3. 5. As noted above, parking provided at a redeveloped Harbor Square will have to be consistent with the City's off street parking regulations as contained in ECDC 17.50. The standards contained in ECDC 17.50 are intended to ensure that adequate off street parking is provided for all uses on a redeveloped Harbor Square. Only a zoning change approved by Council could alter parking requirements. 6. The base height of 35 feet may only be exceeded if public benefits and/or amenities are provided (Page 6). 7. The referenced graphic has been removed from the HSMP. 8. Language has been added under the Dayton Street Frontage Section on Page 7. 9. Wording has been removed under the SR 104 Frontage section on Page 7. Page 4 of 5 Packet Page 231 of 266 Plan addressing height limits, precedent, and views. 10. The City Attorney memorandum addressed three issues. 11. Clarifying language should be added to the Harbor Square a. The height issue is addressed by limiting base height to 35 Master Plan that residential uses must be multifamily and not feet. Any increase in height above 35 feet could only be single-family residential. accomplished through incentive zoning approved by 12. If and when the Harbor Square Master Plan is adopted by the Council. City Council, it should be physically incorporated into the b. Concern with regard to precedent is addressed by treating Comprehensive Plan rather than incorporated by reference. the HSMP as a subarea plan. 13. Any future development proposal shall clearly demark and c. The third question addressed by the City Attorney's provide protection for the Edmonds Marsh by establishing an memorandum had to do with the protection of private area of open space not less than 25 feet landward from the edge views. No specific language with regard to this item has of the Edmonds Marsh and ensure any development preserves been addressed. The memo noted the City has discretion or improves the Edmonds Marsh Park/Walkway. in how it addresses private views. Private view protection 14. The approved Master Plan shall be modified as necessary to is not mentioned in any of the City's Planning Documents maintain consistency with the Shoreline Master Program update or codes. However, as noted in the City Attorney's to be determined following submittal by the City and approved memorandum (Attachment 22 from the November 20, by the State in accordance with process deadlines existent 2012 agenda item on the HSMP), the City has designated between the State and the City. specific public view corridors (See page 58 of the Comprehensive Plan). Protection of the Dayton Street view corridor is called out under the Use and Site Planning section on Page 3. Additionally, language with regard to the Attorney memorandum could be incorporated in the adopting ordinance. 11. No specific language with regard to multifamily development has been added. As noted above, residential development in Harbor Square should not be the principle use, but provide to enhance and support the mixed use nature of Harbor Square. Any more specific provisions regarding residential uses would be the subject of a future rezone approved by Council. 12. See above with regard to incorporating the HSMP. 13. As noted above, setback from the marsh will be determined by the updated Shoreline Master Program currently under review by the City Council. 14. The Setbacks and Ecological Enhancements along Edmonds Marsh section on Page 6 recognizing the HSMP must comply with the HSMP. Page 5 of 5 Packet Page 232 of 266 This area is appropriate for development which takes advantage of its fiber access and strategic location between the waterfront and downtown, but which recognizes the environmental and geographic constraints of the area. . Ultimately, perhaps with the assistance of WRIA 8, Snohomish County Conservation Fu- tures, and other organizations, the southern portion of the near water- front area will be used for an expanded Marsh and/or Marsh buffer. To provide a necessary connection between downtown and the water- front. �t redevelopment in #iris the near waterfront area shall b� provide pedestrian friendly walking ar- eas and public gathering spaces or parks, especially along Dayton and Main Streets. Public view corridors along Dayton and Main Street shall be maintained, and enhanced where possible (former Skippers site). Development design should also not ignore the railroad side of the prop- erties, since this is an area that provides a "first impression" of the city from railroad passengers and visitors to the waterfront. Art work, land- scaping, and modulated building design should be used throughout any redevelopment project. Due to view corridors and the need to maintain a pedestrian scale and small town character, building heights may not be increased, and build- ing bulk shall be limited. Parking must be adequate for any development, due to the need to also provide parking for the waterfront, the train station, and the ferry dock. Development shall include a destination for Edmonds residents and visi- tors, including but not limited to recreational, cultural, dining, lodging, hobby, commercial, tourist or entertainment attractions. Development shall not duplicate existing small scale retail or mixed use development or existing housing stock. Traditional housing such as mixed use, multi- family, transit oriented and condominimum uses shall be avoided, though a modest number of non-traditional housing options such as artist live/work studios may be considered in areas with adequate public ser- vices that are not geologically or otherwise hazardous. Packet Page 233 of 266 From: Clifton, Stephen To: Lien. Kernen; Earling, Dave Subject: FW: Draft comprehensive plan amendment Date: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 11:51:52 AM -----Original Message ----- From: Monillas, Adrienne Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 11:44 AM To: Clifton, Stephen Cc: Petso, Lora; Chave, Rob; Taraday, Jeff Subject: Re: Draft comprehensive plan amendment By the way how does the 14 recommendations of the planning board get incorporated into the plan??? Adrienne Fraley-Monillas Sent from my Pad On Feb 25, 2013, at 6:33 PM, "Monillas, Adrienne" <Adrienne.Monillas@edmondswa.gov> wrote: > Thanks Lora for your thoughts. > I would also like my "vision" added to the plan. > I would like to see this become a tourist destination. I vision multiple small hotels with first floor restaurants, nightclubs, cafes, art gallery's, studios, small shops that sell a variety of item these shops that may sell locally made arts, crafts, and jewelry. To include a year round farmers market in this space. This area should provide connectivity to trains, ferries and buses. This needs to be a walkable area only. > No more height than current zoning. > I would like to see a safe buffer for the marsh and care taken to maintain the fragile environmental aspects. > In my extensive travels the past couple of years internationally and nationally tourists are attracted to this type of development and they bring resources with them. > edmonds needs to become a destination! > Adrienne Fraley-Monillas > Sent from my Pad > On Feb 25, 2013, at 5:09 PM, "Petso, Lora" <Lora.Petso@edmondswa.gov> wrote: >> Stephen/Rob- >> I created the attached draft comprehensive plan amendment based on the public comment, and shared it with council via bcc. >> Since this version deals with entire near waterfront area, I will also work on a version that is specific to Harbor Square, and leaves the rest of the area as is. >> It is just a draft, but it includes most of the ideas raised in public comments. >> Lora Packet Page 234 of 266 >> 2-23-2013 4 42 05 PM >> <2-23-2013 4_42_05 PM.pdf> Packet Page 235 of 266 TORT OF E D M 0 N D S 336 Admiral Way • Edmonds, WA 98020-7214 (425) 774-0549 • FAX (425) 774-7837 • www.portofedmonds.org April 3, 2013 Ft Jil � Mr. Robert Chave, Planning Manager Mr. Kernen Lien, Senior Planner APR 0 City of Edmonds City of Edmonds 201,E 121 Fifth Ave. N. 121 Fifth Ave. N. p�Ald(�jf Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 G1. Re: Port of Edmonds Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment City of Edmonds File No. AMD20110009 Dear Rob and Kernen: This letter is to formally notify the City of Edmonds, through its Planning Department, that the Port of Edmonds is withdrawing its Land Use Application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and/or Sub Area Plan Amendment to have the City adopt the Port's Harbor Square Master Plan as a City Comprehensive Plan Amendment or Sub Area Plan. This formal withdrawal of the Port of Edmonds Land Use Application is necessitated by the City Council's inability to substantively review the Planning Board's recommended decision approving, with conditions, the adoption of the Harbor Square Master Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Council's failure to consider the City Staff s recommendation that the Council similarly adopt that Planning Board recommendation. Nonetheless, the Port of Edmonds understands that it is the City Council's ultimate prerogative to accept the Planning Board's and the City Staff s recommendations and with the Council's reticence to do so, the Port is left with its only realistic recourse, which is to withdraw its Application and terminate the processing of that Application. The Port of Edmonds would like to sincerely thank the Planning Department Staff for its significant time and energy expended in focusing on the substantive issues related to the Harbor Square Master Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application. The Port of Edmonds also sincerely appreciates the thoughtful evaluation and deliberation that the Planning Board undertook in reaching its decision on the Port's Application. Please confirm that the Port of Edmonds Harbor Square Master Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application and related proceedings pending before the City of Edmonds are terminated as a result of this withdrawal of the Port of Edmonds' Application. Again, thank you for your courtesies and cooperation extended through these proceedings. Ve truly yo r R bert Mc he ey Executive Dire for Cc: Port Commissioners Mayor Dave Earling City Council Members Planning Board Members Packet Page 236 of 266 1 1 A 336 Admiral Way - Edmonds, WA 98020-7214 • (425) 774-0549 • FAX (425) 774-7837 • www.portofedmonds.org April 9, 2013 Honorable Dave Earling, Mayor Honorable City Council Members CITY OF EDMONDS 121— Fifth Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Port of Edmonds Harbor Square Master Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Withdrawal Mayor Earling and Council Members: This letter provides notification that the Port of Edmonds has withdrawn its Application for an Amendment to the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the Port's Harbor Square Master Plan into the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. Enclosed with this letter is a copy of the Port of Edmonds Executive Director Robert McChesney's letter to Rob Chave and Kernen Lien, which effects the withdrawal of the Port's Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application and terminates the City's proceedings concerning the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, initiated by the Port's Application. The Port of Edmonds Commission made the decision to withdraw the Port's Application when, after a series of discussions before the City Council, it became apparent there was not sufficient support to obtain a majority vote for acceptance of the Planning Board recommendation to approve, with conditions, the proposed Harbor Square Master Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Instead, Council formally voted to stop consideration of the Port's proposed Master Plan, and instead, craft its own sub -area plan under the auspices of the Port's Harbor Square Master Plan Application. In developing of the Harbor Square Master Plan, the Port followed the City's process as directed by the City's Staff. The process was conducted in an open and transparent manner, beyond any normal standard. The Port involved the public to the maximum extent practical. The Port also accepted all fourteen conditions of the Planning Board. The Port made its case and demonstrated broad public support. It is our sincere belief that what the Port proposed in the Harbor Square Master Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment, represented a reasonable compromise that would have provided the community significant benefits, without jeopardizing its values. It is clear to the Commission that the process failed. Packet Page 237 of 266 While the Commission finds this unfortunate, it understands that the City Council is the decision maker with respect to the Comprehensive Plan. In this case, the Commission believes it was acting not only in the best interest of its constituents, but also in the City's interest by creating opportunities for future beneficial development in our community. The Port of Edmonds is in the business of creating economic opportunity for the benefit of the entire community, which includes 18,000 Port residents and also the Town of Woodway. Economic opportunity needs to be part of the future of the community and we believe strongly that our city cannot thrive if its focus is static or retrospective only. There are important and challenging questions to resolve. Their resolution requires vision, leadership and partnership with the City. Through this last exercise, we didn't quite get there. Frankly, the formal dismissal of the Port's Master Plan for Harbor Square has been disappointing and discouraging to the Commission, the Port Staff, as well as to the many Edmonds/Woodway residents who worked hundreds of hours in developing the proposal. Nonetheless, it is time for us to move on. Consequently, as stated above, the Port has terminated the processing of its Application. The Port Commission stands ready to work with the City to achieve a true partnership and to discuss the future of Harbor Square. What the City Council needs to accept, is that the Port of Edmonds is a separate legal entity; an independent public enterprise with a parallel mandate to the City of Edmonds and the Town of Woodway, for economic development. The Port takes this opportunity to re -state that the fundamental driving premise of future redevelopment at Harbor Square is that it must be economically feasible enough to attract private sector investment participation, while also including the many public amenities the Port's Harbor Square Master Plan proposes. The Port of Edmonds is not a general purpose government and has statutory limitations on the uses to which it can put its property and a fiduciary obligation to generate a full market return from its investments. We invite continued discussion and partnership. Very truly yours, James Orvis, President Port of Edmonds Commission Cc: Port Commissioners Bob McChesney Attachment Packet Page 238 of 266 AM-5706 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/07/2013 Time: 15 Minutes Submitted For: Council Department: City Council Review Committee: Type: Action Information Submitted By: 15. Jana Spellman Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council Subject Title Possible action regarding draft Resolution adopting Robert's Rules of Order as the City Council's new Rules of Procedure. Recommendation Previous Council Action This agenda item was discussed at the 2013 Council Retreat and forwarded to the Public Safety/Personnel Committee for further discussion. Below is an excerpt from those minutes: Edmonds City Council Retreat Approved Minutes February 1-2, 2013 Page 2 "4. CITY COUNCIL PROCESSES A. ROBERT'S RULES Councilmember Johnson explained the Council has been operating for the past 39 years under Resolution No. 292. She acknowledged there are other ways, but she feels Robert's Rules is the best alternative. She referred to Attachment 4, a decision tree for determining whether to continue using Resolution No. 292 or adopt Robert's Rules. City Attorney Jeff Taraday suggested the City Council adopt a complete set of Robert's Rules as its official rules and distribute a shorter primer on the rules to Councilmembers to allow the Council to familiarize themselves with the rules. Councilmember Johnson suggested training on Robert's Rules be provided during a work session. Summary: Schedule a work session and have an ordinance prepared for review by the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee." This agenda item was discussed at the 2/12/2013 Public Safety and Personnel Committee. (Attachment 5: Feb. 12, 2013 PS/Personnel Committee Minutes). The action taken by the PS/P Committee is in the excerpt below: Packet Page 239 of 266 "Presentation to Council on Robert's Rules of Order is on the extended agenda for our April 16 Council Meeting. Council President Petso will be asked to put the draft resolution adopting Roberts Rules of Order on the agenda for discussion and vote at a Council Meeting following this (April 23 or later)." During the April 16, 2013 Council Meeting, Ann Macfarlane from Jurassic Parliament made a presentation regarding Robert's Rules of Order. Attached to the agenda memo was a draft Resolution regarding the Council adopting Robert's Rules of Order as the City Council's new rules of procedure which the Council did not take any action on but moved it to the April 23, 2013 Council agenda. Due to the lateness of the hour, this agenda item was put on the May 7, 2013 Council Agenda. Narrative Before the Council tonight is a draft Resolution entitled A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING RESOLUTION 292, WHICH ADOPTED RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF COUNCIL MEETINGS; ADOPTING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AS THE CITY COUNCIL'S NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE which is on this agenda for possible Council approval. Attachment 7: Resolution 292 Attachments Attachment 1 - Should Council Adopt Robert's Rules of Order Attachment 2 - Which Parliamentary Authority Should Council Choose Attachment 3 - A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making Attachment 4 - Decision Tree Attach 5: 2/12/13 PS/P Committee Minutes Attach 6: Draft Resolution regarding Robert's Rules of Order Attach 7: Resolution 292 Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Linda Hynd Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 05/02/2013 Form Review Date 05/02/2013 09:34 AM 05/02/2013 10:51 AM 05/02/2013 11:14 AM Started On: 04/26/2013 09:26 AM Packet Page 240 of 266 Jurassic ATTACHMENT 1 Should Our Council Adopt Robert's Rules of order? Ann G. Macfarlane, Professional Registered Parliamentarian "Council/Commission Advisor" published by the Municipal Research S�Services Center of Washington, April 2011 The State of Washington gives city councils wide authority to decide how they will carry on their business: "The council shall determine its own rules and order of business, and may establish rules for the conduct of council meetings and the maintenance of order." RCW 3$A.12,120 Some councils have adopted, by resolution or ordinance, a set of guidelines for this purpose, and others have not. Many of these guidelines include reference to Robert's Rules of order, using such language as "meetings shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order and these council rules of procedure. In case of conflict, the council rules of procedure shall prevail." Recently it was suggested to Jurassic Parliament that Robert's Rules of order is too complicated for small cities and towns, and they would do better not to adopt it. We agree that the book is complicated, but we believe that Robert's Rules still provides the best and most useful set of rules of order for civic bodies in our state —provided that folks are willing to do a little work and learn how to use Robert's Rules properly. our argument runs like this: 1. The fundamental principles in Robert are common to all our civic discourse and are not hard to learn. Everyone participating in council debate and discussion should understand that the majority will rule, that the minority have rights that must be respected, that members have a right to information to help make decisions, that courtesy and respect are required, that all members have equal rights, privileges and obligations, and that members have a right to an efficient meeting. z. The use of written motions and amendments provides an efficient and fair way to consider proposals and modify them in accord with the group's preferences. The method is a little unusual, in that amendments are taken up before the motion is voted on, but once groups get used to it, the system works well. 3. Robert's rule that no one may speak a second time until everyone who wishes to do so has spoken once is vital to equalizing power imbalances and giving everyone a fair shake in discussion. We believe that it should be observed by all groups, whether or not they have formally adopted Robert. Packet Page 241 of 266 4. Robert provides "special rules for small boards" that can be useful for smaller councils, should they choose to apply them. 5. Robert also allows groups to develop and apply their own "special rules of order," so if a body wishes to change something in Robert, it is perfectly free to do so. 6. In sticky situations, "do-it-yourself" rulemaking can lead to ad hoc invention of rules, likely supplied by the chair on his own authority. A chair who makes up rules or improvises on the basis of vague memories from student government days is a sure path to problems, especially if the rule -maker has an air of authority about him (or her). 7. While councils often rely on their attorney for advice in this arena, in our experience few attorneys have had serious training in parliamentary procedure and few correct the common and widespread misunderstandings about Robert's Rules. 8. A body cannot do its work without some guidelines. Failing to adopt Robert doesn't mean that there are no guidelines —but without a specific "parliamentary authority," in times of conflict a group will be driven back to rely on "common parliamentary law.' Finding out what "common parliamentary law" requires and how it applies to a given situation is likely to be complicated and expensive, requiring time and attention from legal counsel and qualified parliamentary consultants. Far better to have set the terms of discourse in advance, so that everyone knows and agrees to the way they will consider matters. We believe that adopting a set of common-sense guidelines based on Robert's Rules, incorporating Robert by reference for the more unusual or complicated situations that may arise, and then committing to the education necessary to get everyone on the same page, will pay big dividends for every council willing to make the effort. That education can be quite affordable. Every city budget ought to be able to provide a copy of Robert's Rules of order Newly Revised in Brief to each council member. This little book is a splendid summary of the rules applicable to all but the most exceptional situations. At $7.Oo it's an amazing buy, and you can read it in an evening. Should our council adopt Robert's Rules of order? O Jurassic Parliament 2011. All rights reserved. TERMS OF USE This material is provided for your personal use Permission is hereby granted to make electronic or paper copies provided that the material Is left unchanged_The purchaser may not otherwise modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer or sell any information or services contained in this publication or obtained from our website, or use the content of our website for public or commercial purposes, including any text, images, audio or video, without the written permission of Jurassic Parliament- Jurassic Parliament reserves the right to update our website at anytime without noticetoyou. If you would liketo use or quote this material for any purpose other than expressly as authorized herein, contact the Jurassic Parliament office. DISCLAIMER This material is provided for general educational purposes. Jurassic Parliament makes no representation about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published as part ofthese servicesfor any purpose_ All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind.Jurassic Parliament herebydisdaims all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all warranties and conditions of merchantability, whether express, implied or statutory, fitnessfor a particular purpose,title and non -infringement- Nothingwritten here constitutes legal or business advice. Readerswith specific questions are advised to seek an appropriate credentialed authority to address their issue,. 603 Stewart Street, Suite 6io, Seattle, WA 98iox TEL 206.542.8422 I FAX 206.626.0392 info@jurassicparliament.com E www.jurassicparliament.com Packet Page 242 of 266 ATTACHMENT 2 Q Jurassic Which Parliamentary Authority Should We Choose? Organizations intending to choose a parliamentary authority to guide their meetings have several different choices. This article describes some common authorities. We welcome feedback from our readers who use any of these authorities about the good points or disadvantages they find in them. Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised. This is the most commonly used authority in the United States. By some estimates about ninety percent of the voluntary associations in our country use Robert. Widespread use, breadth of coverage, and the availability of many excellent resources on Robert make this book our first choice. However, be warned that over the years, the book has become extremely detailed. At first glance, it is quite intimidating - the current official version is over 800 pages long. Jurassic Parliament offers many tools to help you get the most out of Robert and apply it in a pragmatic way to your meetings. Current version: iith edition. Be sure to use the official text, and not some publisher's knock -off based on earlier, out-of-date versions. See our article "Which Robert's Rules of order Should I Buy?" for guidance on this point. It is also useful to refer to Robert's Rules of Order In Brief - a short volume which is not an authority, but which serves as an introduction to Robert. The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure. Alice Sturgis wrote the original version of this authority, referred to as "TSC" or "Sturgis" It is well -written and easy to follow. Many medical associations use Sturgis as their authority. However, the book does not cover as many situations as Robert, and it shifts some authority from the group itself to the person running the meeting (the presider). This seems more efficient at first glance, but the added authority may go to the presider's head, and cause him or her to behave in a dictatorial fashion. Sturgis also differs from Robert in some parliamentary actions like "to reconsider" or "to fill a blank." Current version: gth edition The Modern Rules of Order. Donald Tortorice prepared this slim volume for the American Bar Association, though the ABA does not use it during its own meetings. A mere 6o pages long, it may seem a tempting choice. However, Michael Malamut, an attorney and professional registered r► over Price S0.99 May not be photocopied Contact our office for multiple copy permission and pricing Packet Page 243 of 266 parliamentarian, has given it a poor review in one of the leading parliamentary journals. He states that the author derived his expertise from sitting through business corporation meetings, not meetings of nonprofit associations, and the result shows in his work. This book includes "typical minutes" and a chart of motions. Current version: 3rd edition. The Democratic Rules of Order. Fred and Peg Francis of British Columbia, Canada wrote these rules, 76 pages. It seems a good compilation of standard procedure, without a lot of detail. Includes a two - page summary and an example of a meeting governed by these rules. Current version: gth edition. Rosenberg's Rules of Order. Dave Rosenberg, a Superior Court Judge in California, has prepared these rules, available as an eight -page PDF on the World Wide Web. The rules seem unobjectionable but obviously do not provide the detail that may be needed in complex situations. We found the mathematics on voting given in the addendum to be rather peculiar. Many legislatures in the U.S. use Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure. Professional parliamentar- ians may turn to Demeter's Manual of Parliamentary Law and Procedure and Riddich's Rules of Procedure. Bourinot's Rules of order is widely used in Canada. Hugh Cannon has written Cannon's Concise Guide to Rules of order, a lively introduction. And if all else fails, you can turn to Thomas Jefferson for A Manu al of Parliamentary Procedure. We welcome suggestions about adding to this list or modifying the descriptions. Contact us at info @jurassicparliament.com. Which Parliamentary Authority Should We Choose? © Jurassic Parliament 2011. All rights reserved. TERMS OF USE This material is sold for the personal use of the purchaser. Permission is hereby granted to make electronic or paper copies it number according tothe license which you have purchased. The purchaser may not otherwise modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer or sell any Information or services contained in this publication or obtained from our website, or use the content of our website for public or commercial purposes, including any text, images, audio or video, without the written permission of Jurassic Parliament. Jurassic Parliament reserves the right to update our website at anytime without notice to you. If you would liketo use or quote this material for any purpose other than expressly as authorized herein, contact the Jurassic Parliament office, URi-wwwJurassicparliament,com. DISCLAIMER This material is provided for general educational purposes. Jurassic Parliament makes no representation about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published as part of these services for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided `as is" without warrantyof anykind. Jurassic Parliament hereby disclaims ail warranties and conditions with regard to this information, indtiding all warranties and conditions of merchantability, whether express, implied or statutory, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non -infringement. Nothing written here constitutes legal cr business advice. Readers with specific questions are advised to seek an appropriate credentialed authorityto address their issues. urass1C 603 Stewart Street, Suite 6io, Seattle, WA 983oa TEL 206.542.8422 1 FAX 206.626.0392 info@jurassicparliament.com I www.jurassicparliament.com Packet Page 244 of 266 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT 3 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making Posted on November 5. 2012 by Byron Katsuyame One of the things that has always fascinated me as a student and observer of local government has been the process that local legislative bodies use to discuss, debate, and formulate policy decisions. To my- mind, much of what constitutes "good government" is a direct consequence of an open, fair, and effective legislative decision - making process. The open and fair parts are regulated by state laws relating to issues such as campaign finance reporting, public records disclosure, and open public meetings. Effectiveness, on the other hand, is Ieft to the local legislative body. While there are a lot of moving parts in this process and, therefore, lots of opportunities to improve it, one critical aspect, and the focus of this blog post, has to do with the way local legislative bodies deliberate on the policy issues that come before them. When acting in their formal legislative capacity, local councils come together for a very specialized purpose — to discuss, debate, and finally decide on important issues affecting their communities. It is at this point during the give and take of their policy discussions, where arguments are put forth, opinions are swayed, and votes are taken. It's not true that councilmembers always come to such meetings with their minds already made up, as some citizens and members of the press seem to think. So, it is important not only that these discussions take place, but that they be conducted in ways that promote the best possible exchange of information and ideas. To this end, one simple but effective technique designed to improve this process was suggested by Ann Macfarlane, one of MRSC's long-time Council/Commission Advisors, in her 2009 column, "Using the Round Robin Method for Efficient Council Meetings." Ann's column contains some sage advice for local legislative bodies interested in improving both the efficiency and the quality of their meetings. In it she argues that the "round robin method" for council deliberation contained in Roberts Rides of Order is one of the best ways to promote a "fair and judicious discussion of issues in which each member has an equal opportunity to participate." Of course, local government advisory boards and commissions can also benefit from this type of discussion format. In a round robin format, each council or board member participating in key policy discussions is given the opportunity to speak once, going around the table, before anyone can speak a second time. While this may seem like a minor procedural issue, anyone who has spent any amount of time participating on a council, board, or commission knows that who speaks, when, and for how long, can often have profound impacts on the outcomes of many important policy discussions. The round robin format seeks to level the playing field a bit by ensuring that all council and board members have the opportunity and, in fact, are prompted to weigh in on particular issues. Councils or boards that have no rules of procedure or that do not pay attention to the details of how their meetings are conducted are more prone to falling into habits and routines that can reduce their effectiveness as decision - making bodies. How many times have you been at a meeting where one or two members dominate the discussion, either because they are always the ones who speak up first or because they feel compelled to answer every challenge to their point of view? Members don't have to be rude or inconsiderate to end up dominating the discussion. They may just be enthusiastic, which, unfortunately, can have the same negative impact. In either case, to the extent that other members who have valuable opinions to share become less inclined or able to add their thoughts to the mix, the quality of the discussion and ultimately the decision itself can stiffer. Then there are situations where, for whatever reasons, some members may just be reluctant to jump in and offer their opiniomi. http://insi ht.mrsc.or&2012/11/05/a-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1/24/2013 Packet age 245 of 2 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 2 of 3 Sometimes this is because they may feel that they are not as well-informed as they should be on an issue, or perhaps because they are concerned that their opinion will be rejected by the rest of the group, or may be unpopular with a wider audience. Ironically, when called upon, these same individuals often end up making key contributions to the overall discussion. In my experience as a member of the city of Kirkland's Planning Commission for the past eight years, including a year as the chair, I know that we make our best decisions when all our members have taken the opportunity to weigh in on whatever issue is before us. When, on the other hand, we have just one or two members who dominate the discussion, or where, for whatever reasons, some members are reluctant to offer their own point of view, then we become less effective. Particularly in our role as an advisory body to the city council, it is always more helpful to have a thorough discussion of the issues that will, in turn, provide a stronger record of our deliberations for the benefit of the city council as they go on to make their final policy decisions. To be effective, councils and boards should conduct their meetings in ways that promote the fullest discussion of the issues with the broadest possible participation by all of the council or board members. One of the simplest ways to ensure that this takes place is to make use of the round robin discussion format. I'm not suggesting that this approach is necessary for every single discussion. It is intended simply as a tool. Experienced mayors and board chairs know when their council or board will benefit most from a more structured discussion format. Share this: Twitter Facebook Email Like this: *Like Be the first to like this. About AByron Katsu ' Byron has over 30 years of experience in local government police and administration research including such areas as forms of government, strategic planning, performance measurement, and general local government management. In his ov+n community of Kirkland, Byron is a member of the city'S planning commission. C icw ,ill past. by 13} ron Kat�oy.nna -- This entry was posted in Best Practices. Governance. Polity, ©ookmark the permalink. 2 Responses to A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making KHstiana Johnson says: Noveinber 16. 2012 at 3 45 pm Byron, Thank you for this timely post. We at the City of Edmonds are working to review our City, rules and procedures for our 2013 Council Retreat. i really appreciate your comments about the round robin approach in Roberts Rules of Order. i have been tasked with finding a modern and brief set of RRoO. Can you let me kno+, which publication you use? Kristian Johnson Reply Byron Katsuyama says: November 26, 2012 at 11.58 am Kristiana, Follow http�ll1'n ' ht.scireg/2012/11/05/a-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1/24/2013 Packet Age o A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 3 of 3 I asked Ann Macfarlane, Professional Registered Parliamentarian, Jurassic Parliament, who is one of our Council/Commission Advisors, and an expert on Robert's Rules, what she recommends and she provided the following response and attachments: We recommend that everybody use Robert. The best strategy is to have the presider and clerk buy the "big book," Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised rFth edition, and also provide every member v ith a copy of the "little book," Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief, znd edition. This latter volume costs $7 and can be read in an evening. It covers most situations. However, it cannot be adopted as an authority in itself. It is a signpost to the big book. By purchasing both, a city council is sure to have at hand what is needed for any situation. Attached are three articles that you are welcome to share with Kristiana (or anybody- else) on this topic: ■ Which "Robert's Rules" Should I Buy? ■ Which Parliamentar\ Authority Should We Choose? ■ should Our Council Adopt Robert's Rules of Order? Repay MRSC Insight 'llwmrploy at S4 ordPrvss.cojn. FoH ow http://insigsht.mrse.or /2012/11105/a-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1/24/2013 Packet Page 247 of 266- DECISION TREE Rules of Procedures for Conduct of Council Meetings Should the City Council continue using: Resolution 292 YES Action: • Add Resolution 292 to Council web page as a reference for City Council procedures. • Add Resolution 292 to the new Council Reference Manual. Adoptin Rules of Procedure, 1974 NO Should the City Council adopt procedures based on Robert's Rules of Order? Yes Action: IBC • Work Session on Procedures • MRSC — Robert's Rules revised summary. Packet Page 248 of 266 MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETING FEBRUARY 12, 2013 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: Councilmember Joan Bloom Councilmember Strom Peterson The meeting was called to order at 6:09 p.m. Edmonds City Code Updates Al Compaan, Chief of Police Jim Lawless, Assistant Chief of Police Debbie Dawson, Animal Control Officer Carrie Hite, HR Reporting Director Councilmember Bloom requested clarification on Item D. Even though this is the current language, she wanted to clarify the current practice. She would like to amend this to say "Council President approves travel and training for Councilmembers and Boards and Commissions." Councilmember Peterson agreed. This will be amended, and forwarded to City Council for approval on the consent agenda. 2. Robert's Rules Jeff recalled that council agreed to adopt Roberts Rules in its entirety, and use a shortened version. He also suggested that we may want to get training through Jurassic Parliament or perhaps MRSC. There are also self study options that could be purchased for Council library. We agreed to schedule training to be put on agenda for a work session. Suggest someone from MRSC be asked to present. 3. Amendment to Edmonds City Code Chapter 5.14 — Marijuana The Committee discussed a proposed ordinance amending the provisions of Edmonds City Code Chapter 5.14 relating to controlled substances, Paraphernalia, poisons and toxic fumes. The Committee forwarded the ordinance to City Council to place on the Consent Agenda with an approval recommendation. 4. Animals Roaming at Large With Al Compaan and animal control officer, Debbie Dawson, discussed adding "with the exclusion of licensed, spayed and neutered cats" to the animals roaming at large ordinance. Agreed that Debbie Dawson will bring information related to licensing of cats to next Public Safety/Personnel Committee meeting. 5. Discussion Regarding Language to Include on Agendas Related to Public Comment Agreed to adopt Frank Yamamoto's suggested language into the Council Meeting Procedures on the city website 6. Public Comment Bruce Witenberg: Re: questions at end of committee meeting- if not allowing, articulate what has been the problem in the past. Re: Adoption of Roberts' rules. Pointed out that there is a way to re -consider a vote. Can be brought back by someone on the opposing side of the issue. Don't know about time frame. Suggests training be held in council chambers so public can become educated about new rules as well. Roger Hertrich: Mr. Hertrich agreed with every one of Mr. Witenberg points. Re: roaming at large, suggested starting with a simple change such as licensing of cats. Evaluate the results. Re: Roberts' rules- Don't feel adoption of full rules is necessary. Like casual aspect of meeting, don't get too sticky about procedure. Re: Boards and commissions- choice of Mayor, sometimes in conflict with Council. Suggests applications be available to all (Council and Mayor) prior to final selection. Council members Peterson and Bloom explained to Mr. Wittenberg that it was not our intention to eliminate the option of citizens asking questions at a committee meeting. The intent was that the council members at the meeting would ask staff to answer the question(s), if the council member felt it was appropriate to do so. Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Public Safety and Personnel Committee February 12, 2013 Page 1 of 1 Packet Page 249 of 266 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING RESOLUTION 292, WHICH ADOPTED RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF COUNCIL MEETINGS; ADOPTING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AS THE CITY COUNCIL'S NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE. WHEREAS, the city council adopted Resolution 292 in 1974, which adopted rules of procedure for conduct of council meetings; and WHEREAS, Resolution 292 did not adopt Robert's Rules of Order; and WHEREAS, it has been recommended that the city council use Robert's Rules of Order, now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. REPEALER. Resolution 292 is hereby repealed. Section 2. ADOPTION OF ROBERT'S RULES. The city council hereby adopts Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11t" Edition, as its official rules for conducting council meetings. The city council intends that the city official serving as parliamentarian should consult this version of Robert's Rules when asked to provide guidance on a procedural question. City council members wishing to use a shorter version of Robert's Rules for their own convenience should use Robert's Rules of Order In Brief, but the council does not recognize this volume as an authority nor as the city council's official rules. RESOLVED this day of April, 2013. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, DAVE EARLING ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SANDRA CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. 4851-5533-3898, v. 1 Packet Page 250 of 266 RESOLUTION NO. 292 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF COUNCIL MEETINGS. WHEREAS, it has been determined by the City Council that more formal rules of procedure are necessary for the efficient and orderly conduct of public meetings, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, that the rules of procedure attached hereto; identified as Exhibit A and incorporated in full by this reference are hereby adopted as the rules of procedure for all meetings of the City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington. RESOLVED this 5th day of Februar , 1974. APPROVED: ATTEST JL"C/J CIT CLERK PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: MAYOR February 5, 1974 February 1, 1974 1 Packet Page 251 of 266 A. GENERAL RULES OF PROCEDURE. 1. 'Obtainingfloor. Before a member can make a motion or address the body upon any question, it is necessary that he obtain the floor by being recognized by the chairman. If'two or more members shall request the floor -at the same time the chairman shall recog- nize the first member requesting recognition. 2. Second. When a member obtains the floor and Makes a motion, that is in order, the chair should immediaLely inquire if the motion is seconded; if sec- untied the maker of the motion should then be regarded as having the refusal of the floor in preference to all oth-_,r members. 3, 1404-lification of motion. Before any subject is open to debate it is necessary, first, that a :notion be made by a member who has .the floor; second, that it be seconded; and third, that it be stated by the chairman. This does rot prevent suggestions of alterations, be- fore the question is statE:d by the chairman. The chair- man may consult: the members before stating the question tO clarify the motior:. The member who offers the motion, until it has been stated by.the chairman, can modify his motion, or withdraw it entirely; after it is stated he can do neither, without the consent of the body (major-. ity) . For example, the mover may starer, - "With the con - EXHIBIT A 2 Packet Page 252 of 266 sent of the body I will modify my motion to state as follows, * * *" If no one objects it shall be deemed that he has the consent of the body to modify his motion. When the mover modifies his motion, the one who seconds,it can withdraw his second. 4. Statinq the question. After a question has been stated by the chairman, it is in the possession of the body For debate; the mover cannot withdraw or modify it except by obtaining leave from the body as just described, or by moving an amendment. 5. Wi thdrawa 1 or substitution of motion.- When a question is before the body and the mover wishes' to withdraw or modify it, or substitute a different one in its place, with consent of the body, the chairman shall grant perm tision; if any objection is made, it will be necessary to obtain leave to withdraw by a motion for that purpose. This motion cannot be debated cr amended. When a motion is withdrawn, the effect is the same as if it had never been made. 6. A`: stention f r-cin votincT . Any member may abstain from voting on any question, provided, at the time of declaring his abstention he shall 'state the reason. 7. Standinq to cmiestion Procedures. These rules shall govern the parliamentary procedures of the members _2_ 3 Packet Page 253 of 266 and by the members only. Procedures may be questioned only by members of the body, and then only in accordance with these rules. The decision of the chair will be final and conclusive as to all, subject. only to a motion by a member of the body, duly and timely made, in which case the ruling of the body shall be final and conclusive. Nothing in these rules will be construed to prevent the chairman or a member from requesting aid in the inter- pretation of these rules or other matters from the City staff or cfficials. 8. Precedence.. Motions having precedence are those that may be made while another motion is pending. -9. ToTield. Motions yield when they are pending and another matter can be considered while the yielding motion still pends. 10. Ahfalied. %here a motion can have no subordinate motion applied to it, the fact is stated. For example, the motion to continue may not be applied to the motion to 13y on the table. 11. Debate. Debate shall not take place until the chair has stated the question. Debate shall be limited to the immediately pending question, except that the main question is also open when the following motions are pending; postpone indefin.itely,.or reconsider a debatable question. -3- 4 Packet Page 254 of 266 12. Putting the c esL,on. When the debate appears to have closed the chair will ask, "Are you ready for the question?" If no one asks for the floor he shall put the question to vote, making it clear what the question is. 13. Majority_. A majority of those present shall constitute a majority of the body assuming a quorum is present. The chairman has the tie breaking vote, B. SPECIFIC RULES OF PROCEDURE. The following motions are permissible in considering any matter on the agenda, and unless otherwise specified shall rank in precedence and apI)lication as set forth numerically below. 1. UNDEEATABLE MOTIONS. a. (question of order and anneal. A question of order takes precedence of the question giving rise to it, may be put when another member has the floor, needs no second, and must be decided by the chairman without debate. If a member objects he may appeal, which if seconded, will immediately be put to the body. An appeal is waived if riot made immediately. On appeal the decision of the chair is sustained on a tie vote. b. SusDens.ion of rules. This motion may not be amended, nor another motion be applied to it, -4 -- 5 Packet Page 255 of 266 nor a vote on it reconsidered. Rules of the body may not be suspended except for a definite and specific purpose and by a vote of one more than a majority present. Nothing else may be done under the suspension. It may not be renewed at the same meeting if once defeated. It shall be in order to change the order of the agenda without suspending the rules. No rule can be suspended when the negative vote is as lafge as the minority protected by that rule. c. To lav_on the table. This motion may not be used for purposes of continuance of a matter which has been specially called for pub- lic hearing, which is done by a motion to con- tinue. It may not be amended nor an affirmative vote on it be reconsidered. If carried the subject tabled may not be considered again until the body votes to take it from the table, which motion is also undebatable. The object of the motion is to postpone the subject in such a manner 't:;at it can be taken up at any time, either at the same or some future meeting. It may be used to supress a question for that meeting, but not for a matter for which a public meeting has been specially set. The -5- 6 Packet Page 256 of 266 effect of the motion is to place on the table everything that adheres to the subject, so'that if an amendment be ordered to -lie on the table, the subject which it is proposed to amend is also tabled. Hawever, it may be limited to the par- ticular pending matter and if so adopted the remaining matters shall still be before the body. After demand for the previous question up to the time of taking final action under it, it is in order to move that the main question be laid on the table. Passage requires the vote of one more than a majority of the members present. d. The previous question. This motion is not amendable and applies to any debatable question, but is not debatable itself. It re- quires the vote of one more than a majority of the members present for its adoption. When called, and seconded, the chair shall immediately put the question. If the motion fails to carry by a majority plus one of the members present, the debate will continue as if the motion had not been made. If adopted the chair shall immed- iately bring the body to vote upon the pending question. If applied to an amendment to a pending 7 Packet Page 257 of 266 t. question it brings to a vote not only the motion to amend but also the question to be amended. However, the motion for the previous question may be limited.to the pending amendment, and, if adopted, debate will be closed only to the motion to amend. It shall be proper for a member to submit a motion and move the previous question thereon and thus cut off debate on the motion. In this case the chair shall first put the motion for previous question to vote. 2. DEBATABLE MOTIONS. a. Continue to a certain day. This motion yields to all undebatable motions, and take precedence of all other debatable motions, except that it may be amended by altering the time, and the previous question can be applied to it with- out affecting any other motions pending. b. To commit or refer. This motion is to commit or refer a matter to a committee.- It can he amended by altering the committee, or giving the committee instructions. The debate on the motion opens the.debate on the main question it is proposed to commit. c. To amend. This motion takes precedence 8 Packet Page 258 of 266 over nothing but the question to which it is proposed to amend and yields to all questions except to postpone indefinitely. It can be applied to all but undebatable questions, an amendment of an amendment, to postpone indef- initely or to reconsider. It can be amended itself, but an amendment of an amendment cannot be amended. An amendment may be inconsistent with the one already adopted, or may be directly in conflict with the spirit of the original motion, but it must have a direct bearing upon the"subject of that motion. A motion to amend by inserting new words once passed may not be the subject matter of a new amendment to change the same words. The proper motion is the motion to reconsider the vote by which the words were inserted. A motion to amend may be made to "divide the question" into two or more questions as the mover specifies, so as to get a separate vote on any particular point or points. d. To nostoone indefinitely. This motion takes precedence of nothing except the question to which it is applied and yields to all motions except to emend. It cannot be amended, and opens 9 Packet Page 259 of 266 to debate the entire question which it is proposed to postpone. Its effect is to entirely remove the question from the body for that session. The previous question, if ordered when this motion is pending, applies only to it without :-effecting the main question. It cannot be applied to a matter that has been specially set for public hearing. A negative vote on it cannct be reconsidered. e. Princit}al cLue_sti-on. The main or principal question is a motion to bring before the body for its consider_aticn any partical)r subject. No principal motion can be mare when, any other motion is before the body. It takes precedence over nothing and yields to all. C. MISCET. fAN'FCt,1S MOTIONS. 1. To rescind. This motion cannot he made for a matter that has been voted upon for which a matter has been specially called for public hearing. However, for other. matters tr, whim it is appropriately addressed,, as wnere it is too late to reconsider the vote, :,.e motion is the course to pursue to rescind an objectionable policy, order or motion; it is debatable. 2. Tc reconsider. This motion is not in order after the body :.as votes: upon the principal question which is H= 10 Packet Page 260 of 266 the subject matter of a specially called public hearing unless made immediately after thereon and before any mem- ber of the public has left the public hearing. It is otherwise in order at and• time, even when another member has the floor, but not after that session has adjourned. It must be made by a member who voted with the pre- vailing side. It can be applied to the vote of every other question, except as Noted above, and except to 5u_ ljt:nd t:h% rules and an affirmative vote: to lay on the table or to take from the table. The motion may not be amended. Whether or not it is- debit-,ule depends upon whether the question to be recon- sidere:1 is debatable or undebatable. It may be laid on the table:, in which case, the reconsideration, like any other question, can be tziken from the table. 3. Roll calt. Any member may demand a roll call vote any time before or after any question is put. The demand needs no second and the chairman must ask for a roll call_ vote on demand. It is not debatable and may be applitA tc. any question. It is waived if after the vote it is not ir•„^.iediately made and prior to the next matter bei nq considered. 10. 11 Packet Page 261 of 266 c (V 04 0 c 0 -i 41 aj U)-P o M z .� .O .� 14 m 0 Z 44 UNDEBATABLE a. Question of Order - Appeal b. Suspension of Rules C. Lay on Table d . Previous Question DEBATALUE a. ContinLIO to Certain Day b. Comnit or Refer c. Amend d. Postpone Indefinitely e. Principle Question MISCELLANEOUS a. Rescind b. Reconsider C. Roll Call 1 A.V. N.V. c 0 0) ro 4j ro � m >t :. •-4 Un r-4 M +J M Q O -14 Q1 m, U vai Packet Page 262 of 266 12 SUGGESTED FORMS 1. UNDEBATABLE MOTIONS a. Question of order. Member: "I raise a point of order." Chair: "State your point of order." Member: States his point of order Chair: Ruling by the chairman, who may dive reasons. Member: "I appeal from the decision of the chair." Chair: (If seconded) "Shall the decision of the chair stand as the decision of the -body?" b. Susnei►sion of rules ari�ority` Aus (nee) Member: "I move to suspend the rules requiring..." c. To lay on table (majority plus one) Member: "I move to lay the question (stating it) on the table." Member: "I move to take the question (stating it) from the table." d. Previous question (majority plus ene) Member: "I call (demand or move) for the previous question." Chair: (If seconded)`, "Shall the main question be now put?" Member: "I call for the previous question on the amendment." 13 Packet Page 263 of 266 Chair: (If seconded) "Shall the question be now put on the amendment?" 2. DEBATABLE MOTIONS a. Continue to a certain d��majori_}�y) Member: "I move to continue the question of (stating it) to the next regular for recessed] meeting of (date) . NOTE: (1) Zoning matters must be decided and re- ported by the planning commission within 90 days of the application. (2) Plats and subdivisions must be approved, disapproved or returned to applicant for mod- ification or correction within 60 days from elate of filing, unless applicant files written consent for longer period in which to act. b. To commit or refer (majority) Member: "I move to refer the subject to a committee." C. To amend (majority) Member: "I move to amend the motion to 'add', or 'insert', to 'strike', to 'strike out and insert ', to 'divide the question' (into two or more questions), etc." d. To postpone indefinitely tma 'orit�) Member: "I move to postpone the question indefinit-ley." -2- 14 Packet Page 264 of 266 e. Principal question - (majority, unless otherwise indicated) Member: "I move that . [REZONE] "...proposed Ordinance No. 1234 be passed." [REZONE DENIED] "...Planning Commission Resolution No. 123 be affirmed and.the requested rezone denied." [AMENDMENT TO "...proposed Ordinance No. 1234 COMPREHENSIVE be passed." PLAN] [DENIAL OF "...Planning Commission AMENDMENT TO Resolution No. 123 be affirmed COMPREHENSIVE and the --requested amendment to PLAN] the comprehensive plan be denied." [LID -RESOLUTION "...proposed Resolution of OF INTENTION] Intention No. 123 be passed establishing the public hearing on the day of 196 NOTE : If health issue, must be passed unanimously. [LID -ORDINANCE "...that proposed Ordinance No. FORMING LID] 1234 be passed." NOTE: If health issue, must be passed unanimously. [STREET "...that the public hearing on the VACATION -SET proposed street vacation be fixed HEARING DATE] on the day of J 196 and that proposed Resolution No. 123 be passed." NOTE: Date must be not less than 20 nor more than 60 days from the date of passage of Resolution. [STREET °'...proposed Ordinance No. 1234 VACATION- be passed." APPROVAL] [STREET "...the proposed street vacation be VACATION- denied." DISAPPROVAL] 15 Packet Page 265 of 266 [ANNEXATION- "...a public meeting be set with the RECEIPT OF iniating parties to determine whether INTENTION TO the city will accept the proposed ANNEX BY 10%] annexation and whether it shall - require the assumption of existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed for the day of 196_ . " NOTE:Must not be more than 60 days after the filing of the request." [ANNEXATION- "...a public hearing be set for RECEIPT OF the day of 196_ PETITION FOR for the hearing on the proposed ANNEXATION-75%] annexation." (ANNEXATION- "...that` proposed Ordinance No. FINAL APPROVAL] 1234 be passed." [ANNEXATION- "...that the proposed annexation FINAL DENIAL] be denied." 3. MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS. a. To rescind (majority) Member: "I move to rescind that motion, policy, etc." b. To reconsider (majority) Member: "Having voted on the prevailing side, I move that we reconsider the vote on the motion to (stating it) and have such__ motion entered on the record." c. Roll call (an member) Member: "I demand a roll call vote." No second needed. Chairman: "The secretary will please call the roll." 16 Packet Page 266 of 266